Brigitte Macron (left) and her husband Emmanuel. Getty Images
French First Lady Brigitte Macron is preparing to submit scientific and photographic evidence in a U.S. court to show that she is a woman. The move is part of a legal case she and President Emmanuel Macron filed against commentator Candace Owens, who claimed Brigitte was born male.
The Macrons say the claims circulated by Owens are false and deeply hurtful. Their legal team says Brigitte has been very upset by the rumours, which they call “a distraction” for both her and the president. They believe the allegations damage her reputation and cause harm.
As part of the defamation lawsuit, Brigitte and Emmanuel Macron are planning to use expert testimony, photos from when Brigitte was pregnant, and images of her raising her children. They say these will serve as proof to counter the repeated false claims.
Owens has promoted her view through a podcast series and social media that Brigitte Macron was born a man, using the name “Jean-Michel Trogneux,” which is actually the name of Brigitte’s brother. The Macrons have denied the claims over many years, saying they are based on conspiracy theories, and have already won a defamation case in France over similar allegations—though that was overturned on appeal.
Lawyer Tom Clare, representing the Macrons in this case, said Brigitte is “firmly resolved to do what it takes to set the record straight.” He acknowledged that the process will require her to expose parts of her private life in public, something she views as uncomfortable but necessary.
The legal complaint was filed in Delaware in July 2025. It accuses Owens of spreading lies that she knew were untrue, to gain attention, money, or influence. Owens has responded through her legal team by trying to dismiss the case, arguing issues like jurisdiction and free speech.
President Macron has also spoken out, reaffirming that his wife has always been a woman. Supporters of the Macrons say the case matters beyond their personal family—it highlights how false claims and rumours can spread online, and how people in public life can be hurt by misinformation.
This case is ongoing. It has sparked discussion about what constitutes defamation, how public figures are treated online, and the balance between free speech and respect.
