Source: YouTube
French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte have filed a 22‑count defamation lawsuit against conservative media personality Candace Owens. The case, filed in Delaware Superior Court, accuses Owens of spreading false claims that Brigitte Macron is a man and using those claims to generate attention, sell merchandise, and grow her audience.
The lawsuit includes demands for actual and punitive damages, though the amount is unspecified. Legal documents describe a year‑long pattern of falsehoods, beginning in March 2024 when Candace Owens first made the accusation on her podcast. She claimed she would stake her entire career on its truth, repeated it on social media, and produced a YouTube series titled “Becoming Brigitte,” which built on the original claim with increasingly bizarre allegations.
A Lawsuit Built on Repeated Refusals
The complaint alleges that she promoted a false story that Brigitte Macron was born male and had stolen another woman’s identity. It further accuses Owens of inventing claims that the Macrons are blood relatives and that Emmanuel Macron’s political rise was orchestrated by a CIA mind-control plot. According to the filing, the Macrons repeatedly asked Candace Owens to retract her statements. Rather than respond, the right‑wing podcaster doubled down and escalated her rhetoric, mocked the couple, pushed additional conspiracy content, and ignored legal warnings.
Tom Clare, the attorney representing the Macrons, stated that legal action became unavoidable after Owens refused to back down. He described the situation as a “campaign of defamation plainly designed to harass and cause pain,” noting the real‑world impact on the couple’s personal and public lives, which now face humiliation each time they appear in public due to these “vile fabrications.”
First Amendment Debate Ignited
A representative for Owens said she had not been served and first learned of the case through media reports, calling it an attack by a foreign government on an American journalist’s First Amendment rights. Owens later posted a video denouncing the lawsuit as a “desperate public relations strategy” and taunted the Macrons on Instagram.
Under U.S. law, defamation claims involving public figures must meet the “actual malice” standard, requiring proof the defendant knowingly spread false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The Macrons’ team says it has provided Owens with “incontrovertible evidence” that Brigitte Macron was born female, is not related by blood, and has no connection to any other conspiracy theories Owens circulated.
Owens and her companies, incorporated in Delaware, are the named defendants. The filing also highlights her alleged monetization of these claims through branded merchandise and click‑driven content, reinforcing the view her motive was financial gain rather than political expression.
Owens’s Role in Conservative Media
Candace Owens rose to prominence through Turning Point USA and later as a commentator with The Daily Wire. She became polarizing for her views on race, feminism, vaccines, and international affairs. In early 2024, she left The Daily Wire after controversial statements about Jewish influence in American institutions, then launched an independent platform still attracting a large audience.
Her influence grew despite repeated misinformation accusations—questioning COVID vaccine legitimacy, casting doubt on the Holocaust, and circling conspiracies about political figures. The Macron case may be her most legally serious, given the number of claims and the plaintiffs’ profile.
Testing the Boundaries of Free Expression
The lawsuit may test the line between free expression and targeted defamation in an era where social media amplifies personal attacks. The Macrons insist their goal is accountability, not censorship. Owens’s defenders warn that political figures should expect harsh criticism and that legal action risks chilling dissent.
Yet unlike typical political commentary, this case centers on provably false identity‑based claims persisting for over a year. If the court sides with the Macrons, the ruling could set a landmark for applying defamation law to influencers who repeatedly ignore retraction requests.
Should public figures like Candace Owens be held legally accountable when they profit from spreading false claims about foreign leaders? Tell us what you think.
Survey
Loading ...
