Conservative commentator Candace Owens is doubling down on her controversial claims about French First Lady Brigitte Macron, demanding medical evidence as part of a high-stakes international defamation battle that exposes the absurd lengths to which foreign officials will go to silence American free speech.
Story Highlights
- Candace Owens faces Delaware defamation lawsuit from French President and First Lady over gender conspiracy claims
- Brigitte Macron’s legal team confirms submission of scientific and photographic evidence to counter allegations
- Case highlights tension between American free speech protections and international efforts to control discourse
- Legal experts note high burden for public figures to prove “actual malice” in US defamation cases
International Legal Battle Unfolds in Delaware Court
The Macrons filed their defamation lawsuit in Delaware federal court in July 2025, targeting Owens for promoting conspiracy theories that originated with French bloggers Amandine Roy and Natacha Rey in 2021. The case represents an unprecedented attempt by foreign political figures to use American courts against a conservative commentator exercising her First Amendment rights. Owens’ legal team has filed a motion to dismiss, arguing lack of jurisdiction and undue hardship for their client.
French Officials Prepare Scientific Defense Strategy
Attorney Tom Clare, representing the Macrons, confirmed his clients will present scientific and photographic evidence, including expert testimony and family documentation. The legal team describes the process as “incredibly upsetting” but necessary to counter what they characterize as deliberate disinformation. This approach demonstrates the extraordinary measures foreign officials are willing to take when challenged by American media personalities who refuse to be silenced.
Free Speech Protections Face International Pressure
US defamation law traditionally sets a high bar for public figures seeking damages, requiring proof of “actual malice” – knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth. Legal experts note this standard provides robust protection for American commentators, even when their statements are controversial or offensive to foreign sensibilities. The case tests whether international political figures can successfully weaponize American courts against conservative voices who challenge official narratives.
Owens has consistently maintained her position, framing the lawsuit as an attack on free speech and refusing to back down despite facing the full weight of the French political establishment. Her stance resonates with conservatives who view this as another example of foreign interference in American discourse and the targeting of patriotic voices who dare to question global elites.
Broader Implications for Conservative Media
This case could establish dangerous precedents for how foreign officials use American legal systems to silence conservative commentators. Media analysts highlight the chilling effect such international lawsuits could have on American free speech, particularly when backed by the resources of foreign governments. The outcome may determine whether conservative voices can continue operating without fear of costly international litigation designed to bankrupt and silence them through legal intimidation tactics.
Sources:
France’s 1st Lady to present scientific evidence in defamation suit over gender rumors
Macrons to present scientific evidence to prove Brigitte’s gender in Candace Owens case
French first lady to submit scientific evidence in US defamation case
Brigitte Macron to provide scientific proof in US court case against Candace Owens
