The legal action accuses her of 22 separate defamatory statements, contending they caused immense emotional and reputational harm. However, when examined closely, the case against Owens becomes less about proven falsehoods and more about silencing a controversial but evidence-supported opinion.

Candace Owens did not simply invent this theory. She built her case around existing claims that have circulated in France since at least 2021. Central to her argument is the existence of Jean-Michel Trogneux – Brigitte’s real brother. The coincidence in names is undeniably curious, and Owens has publicly stated that she is asking questions based on available information, not making definitive claims of fact. Furthermore, she refers to recent French legal precedent to support her case. In July 2025, a French appeals court overturned libel convictions against two women who had made the same claims about Brigitte Macron, ruling that their assertions did not meet the legal threshold for defamation in France. This ruling weakens the argument that Owens acted maliciously or recklessly. If French courts are allowing these statements as part of public discourse, how can a U.S. court argue they were legally and morally out of bounds?

Under U.S. law, especially involving public figures, the burden of proof for defamation is very high. The Macrons must show “actual malice” – that Owens knowingly lied or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Given that Owens has cited a living person named Jean-Michel Trogneux, referenced a French court ruling in favor of other accusers, and framed her commentary as investigative questioning rather than accusation, it’s difficult to see how that threshold is met. Her videos, including the widely viewed “Becoming Brigitte” series, do not declare the claims as indisputable facts but rather explore the inconsistencies and mysteries surrounding Brigitte’s early life.

Critics of Owens may point to her sensationalist style and her clear political motivations, but these do not automatically equate to malice. Many journalists and commentators throughout history have challenged powerful figures with uncomfortable questions. That’s the hallmark of free speech. Just because a theory is provocative or controversial doesn’t mean it is defamatory – especially if it is backed by circumstantial evidence and grounded in public interest.

Moreover, the Macrons’ choice to sue in Delaware may appear strategic, perhaps hoping for a more sympathetic jurisdiction. But even there, U.S. legal standards for defamation will apply. And in this case, Owens has strong legal footing. She has reason to believe what she said was true or at least plausibly arguable, which makes her commentary protected under the First Amendment.

In the court of public opinion, the Macrons may win sympathy for enduring personal attacks. But legally, this looks like an uphill battle. Candace Owens has not only cited evidence but has shown that similar claims have been debated in France without legal punishment. Unless the Macrons can prove she acted with clear intent to harm, this lawsuit risks becoming a high-profile example of political overreach and an attempt to stifle uncomfortable discussion.

The bottom line is this: in a free society, even the most powerful figures must tolerate public scrutiny – especially when there’s some foundation for the questions being asked. Candace Owens may be a lightning rod, but in this case, she has more than enough evidence to justify her investigation. Whether one agrees with her conclusions or not, she deserves the legal protection afforded to those who challenge the official narrative with genuine inquiry. All she has been asking is that Brigitte produces a photo of herself as a female before the age of 30, biological proof of her sex, and that she appears with her alleged brother in a public appearance.

The post Brigitte Macron Takes Candace Owens to Court Over Gender Claim – But Candace Is Armed With Evidence appeared first on KIMU.

Part of the story was the silencing of countless French journalists with baseless injunctions, never released to the actual case at hand – whether Brigitte was actually born a male. There are also rumours of journalists who have been killed to silence the story. Well, we now have some massive news to prove that this transvestigation is legitimate.

In a dramatic legal twist, two French women previously convicted of defaming First Lady Brigitte Macron by alleging she was “born a man” have been acquitted on appeal. The Paris Appeal Court delivered its ruling on Thursday, stating that Amandine Roy, a 53-year-old clairvoyant, and Natacha Rey, a 49-year-old blogger, acted within their legal rights when they made the controversial claims.

The decision overturns earlier convictions for defamation, a move that is already stirring political and legal debate in France. Both Roy and Rey had appeared in a four-hour YouTube video in December 2021, alleging that Macron was born as a baby boy named Jean-Michel Trogneux – the name of Brigitte Macron’s real-life brother. They also questioned the existence of her first husband, André-Louis Auzière, who reportedly died in 2020.

The Paris Appeal Court declared that the 18 statements reviewed from the video did not constitute defamation, and instead represented protected free speech “in good faith.” As a result, both women will no longer have to pay the fines that had previously been levied against them – Roy’s fine had been reduced to €1,000, and Rey was due to pay €470 after suspension of most of her original sentence.

Their lawyers welcomed the ruling with elation. “We’re acquitted!” exclaimed Maud Marian, counsel for Roy. François Danglehant, Rey’s lawyer, also celebrated the judgment, which gives the women legal freedom to repeat their claims.

Brigitte Macron’s Legal Team Responds

Brigitte Macron, 72, did not attend the hearing as she was concluding a high-profile state visit to the UK with her husband, French President Emmanuel Macron. However, her legal representatives expressed shock and disappointment, confirming she intends to appeal the decision further at France’s highest court, the Cour de Cassation.

Sources close to the First Lady said she is “devastated” by the ruling, particularly as it comes at a difficult personal time – just days after the death of her elder sister, Anne-Marie Trogneux, aged 93.

Broader Context: Cyberbullying and Conspiracy Theories

This ruling comes amid a broader online campaign against Brigitte Macron. Several conspiracy theories targeting her gender, sexuality, and age difference with her husband have been amplified in recent years. These range from unfounded claims about her identity to more disturbing accusations, including being likened to a child abuser.

In August 2024, Brigitte Macron filed a cyberbullying complaint, which is currently the basis of a separate case against four male defendants who allegedly spread malicious claims online. Among them is Aurelien Poirson-Atlan, a 41-year-old known online as “Zoe Sagan,” a prominent figure in French conspiracy circles. He and the others deny the charges.

Their trial, which is set to take place at the Paris Correctional Court, could carry serious consequences – cyberbullying in France is punishable by up to two years in prison.

Political and Personal Ramifications

The Macrons’ relationship has long attracted public scrutiny. They first met when Emmanuel Macron was a teenager and Brigitte was his drama teacher – a story that continues to fuel speculation and controversy in French society. Despite being married since 2007, their unconventional love story remains a source of gossip, criticism, and admiration in equal measure.

Adding to the tension, footage from a May state visit to Vietnam appeared to show Brigitte Macron slapping the President on the tarmac – an incident both later described as a “minor squabble.”

Meanwhile, the publication of Becoming Brigitte, a tell-all biography by journalist Xavier Poussard, and repeated commentary from American influencer Candace Owens have helped reignite public interest and conspiracy around the First Lady.

What’s Next?

With a likely appeal to the Cassation Court and a separate cyberbullying trial approaching, the legal and public scrutiny surrounding Brigitte Macron is far from over. This case touches not just on defamation, but on the complex interplay between free speech, conspiracy culture, online harassment, and public life in the digital age.

As the legal dust settles, one thing is clear: Brigitte Macron remains a lightning rod for controversy — and the debate over where free speech ends and defamation begins is far from resolved.

More updates to follow as the story develops.

The post Brigitte Macron Defamation Case: Women Who Claimed She Was Born Male Cleared on Appeal appeared first on KIMU.