Candace Owens is about to face another legal battle. French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte are escalating their defamation fight against the conservative commentator by filing suit in her home state of Tennessee. The move marks a significant shift in strategy—this time, they’re suing Owens personally in federal court rather than pursuing her through corporate entities. The case underscores the real stakes of online misinformation, particularly when conspiracy theories target public figures and their families.
The new lawsuit, filed Nov. 4, arrives months after the Macrons’ initial defamation action in July 2025. Back then, Candace Owens faced claims in Delaware court for spreading false allegations about Brigitte’s identity—specifically, conspiracy theories claiming she was born male and spent decades concealing her identity. A judge dismissed Owens as an individual defendant due to jurisdiction issues, but allowed claims against her associated businesses to proceed. That hasn’t stopped her. She’s continued pushing the narrative through her podcast and social media, even producing an eight-part series called “Becoming Brigitte” dedicated to the theory.
Now the Macrons are taking the fight directly to her. “Mrs. Owens was adamant that Tennessee is where this case belongs because it’s where she lives,” a representative for the couple told the Guardian. “With this filing, we are giving her exactly what she has repeatedly demanded.”
The new complaint contains 88 claims against Owens personally, including defamation, false light, and defamation by implication. The suit argues that despite being sued once already, Owens has only doubled down, treating the controversy as an endless content machine. She’s monetized it too—the couple takes specific issue with merchandise and fundraising connected to the allegations.
Then there’s the doll.
The Macrons’ legal team flagged a Brigitte Macron doll that Owens has used to mock the first lady. The complaint describes it as a “grotesque” caricature and points to its use as emblematic of how Owens has transformed defamatory claims into entertainment. The lawsuit characterizes it as a “caricature [of] Mrs. Macron’s body” and argues that Owens’ “campaign against Mrs. Macron is driven by animus toward Mrs. Macron’s perceived gender identity, gender and sexuality.”
Owens’ response was predictably flippant. She acknowledged the lawsuit on X and continued her pattern of mockery. “Those of you who are fans of the show know that Brigitte-Doll has never pursued the limelight. For her to be called ‘grotesque’ by the French couple is hurtful, to say the least,” she wrote, treating the legal action as fodder for her audience.
For the Macrons, this is not entertainment. They’re seeking actual, presumed, and punitive damages along with an injunction to prevent Owens from continuing to publish defamatory statements.
Notably, the lawsuit makes a broader point about the nature of the allegations themselves. “There is nothing shameful or defamatory about being a man, being transgender, or being gay,” the complaint states. “Owens’ statements are defamatory because they accuse the Macrons of lying to France and to the world for decades about who Mrs. Macron is—and of committing crimes to conceal that supposed lie.”
The case reflects a pattern: wealthy and powerful public figures increasingly using the courts to push back against online conspiracy theories. Whether the Tennessee court will prove more receptive to the Macrons’ claims than the Delaware court remains to be seen. But what’s clear is that Owens has shown no sign of backing down, and the Macrons appear committed to pursuing this regardless of jurisdiction.
★TR★
