Why does Brigitte Macron need to ‘prove’ she’s a woman in a US court?
French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte Macron, are suing U.S. influencer Candace Owens in Delaware, accusing her of defamation for repeatedly claiming that Brigitte was born male (specifically, that she is Jean-Michel Trogneux, a person who is actually Brigitte’s older brother). The lawsuit was filed in July 2025 and contains 22 counts, including claims about identity theft, false statements, and intentional spread of conspiracy theories.
The Macrons’ legal team, led by attorney Tom Clare, have said that they will present “photographic and scientific evidence” in U.S. court to prove Brigitte Macron is a woman. Among the evidence they plan to use are photos from when she was pregnant and images showing her raising her children. They also anticipate expert testimony to refute the allegations. Brigitte Macron has described the claims as deeply offensive.
Owens has defended her statements as protected free speech under the First Amendment, and has also filed a motion to dismiss the suit on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that the Delaware court may not be the proper venue. Meanwhile, the Macrons assert that Owens knew her claims were false or made them with reckless disregard for the truth (i.e. “actual malice”), which is a legal standard required in U.S. defamation law when suing over false statements about public figures.
This is not the first time such allegations have been made: the rumor that Brigitte Macron was born male surfaced in French blogs around 2021. The Macrons previously won a defamation lawsuit in France against two bloggers who made similar claims, but that ruling was overturned or modified on appeal in 2025 on grounds related to free speech.
The lawsuit’s complaint argues that Owens’ repeated false claims have caused personal distress, harm to Brigitte’s reputation, and damage to the couple’s public standing. The Macrons also claim Owens used her podcast, media appearances, and content monetization to promote the false narrative, even after being asked to retract her statements. The amount of damages has not been specified.
Why it matters
-
Defamation precedent: The case could set an important U.S. legal precedent on whether foreign leaders and spouses can successfully sue American commentators for defamation.
-
Cross-border free speech: Highlights tensions between U.S. free-speech protections and European expectations of stronger protections against reputational harm.
-
Digital misinformation: Demonstrates how conspiracy theories can spread globally online and impact real public figures’ reputations.
-
Political implications: The Macron presidency is directly touched by the lawsuit, raising questions about political credibility, international perception, and respect for leaders’ families.
-
Evidence standard: The Macrons’ willingness to present medical, photographic, and scientific proof illustrates how personal the case has become and the lengths public figures may go to disprove damaging falsehoods.
Key legal outcomes
-
The Macrons filed a 22-count defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens in Delaware in July 2025.
-
Owens has filed a motion to dismiss, arguing lack of jurisdiction and First Amendment protections.
-
The Macrons’ legal team plans to introduce photographic and scientific evidence proving Brigitte Macron’s identity as a woman.
-
Prior French rulings against bloggers over the same conspiracy have shown the Macrons can win such cases, but U.S. law sets a higher bar requiring proof of actual malice.
-
Potential damages have not yet been quantified, but the case could establish whether U.S. courts will apply defamation standards to protect foreign heads of state and their spouses.
Publication date & Live Link
- Publication date: September 18, 2025
- Live link: Brigitte Macron to submit scientific evidence in U.S. court to disprove Candace Owens’ claim — Yahoo News
