Macrons Escalate Defamation War Against Candace Owens With 88-Count Tennessee Filing

France's first couple files a second lawsuit — this time in Owens's home state — targeting the podcaster personally with 88 counts over false transgender conspiracy claims. The legal strategy is methodical: close every jurisdictional escape route.

Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron have filed a new defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens in Nashville, Tennessee, escalating a transatlantic legal confrontation over the far-right podcaster's repeated false claims that France's first lady was born a man. The 88-count complaint, filed 4 November, targets Owens personally — closing a jurisdictional gap from the couple's original Delaware suit, which a judge limited to Owens's registered companies after she argued she didn't live in that state.

The core falsehoods at issue are specific and verifiable: that Brigitte Macron, 73, was born as her older brother Jean-Michel Trogneux and committed identity theft to conceal a gender transition; that Emmanuel Macron's presidency was engineered by a CIA mind-control program; and that the couple are blood relatives committing incest. None of these claims have any factual basis. The new filing adds counts of false light and defamation by implication alongside straight defamation. The Macrons' legal team framed the Tennessee filing as a direct response to Owens's own jurisdictional argument: "Mrs Owens was adamant that Tennessee is where this case belongs because it's where she lives. With this filing, we are giving her exactly what she has repeatedly demanded." It is a deliberate strategic move — eliminating Owens's ability to dodge personal liability by forum-shopping. The complaint alleges a clear financial motive. Since the Delaware suit was filed, Owens has doubled down with an eight-part podcast series called "Becoming Brigitte," accompanied by merchandise including a "Brigitte doll" described in the filing as a "grotesque, alien-like figure" that caricatures Macron's body. The lawsuit contends Owens uses the conspiracy narrative to sell merchandise, collect donations, and grow her audience — a profit engine built on fabricated claims. The lawsuit makes an important rhetorical distinction: "There is nothing shameful or defamatory about being a man, being transgender, or being gay." The defamation, the Macrons argue, lies in the accusation that they have systematically lied to France and the world for decades and committed crimes to sustain that lie. This framing shifts the legal theory from identity-based harm to fraud-based reputational damage. Owens responded on X with characteristic deflection, treating the doll as a character with its own feelings: "For her to be called 'grotesque' by the French couple is hurtful, to say the least. Brigitte-Doll will be making no further statements at this time." The performative humor is part of the monetization machinery the lawsuit targets. The Delaware case against Owens's companies remains pending separately. Together, the two suits represent a pincer strategy: corporate liability in Delaware, personal liability in Tennessee. The Macrons seek actual, presumed, and punitive damages plus a narrowly tailored injunction barring republication of defamatory statements. Whether US courts will grant injunctive relief that effectively constrains speech — even demonstrably false speech — remains the most consequential open question.