Late last month, French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte Macron, filed a defamation lawsuit in the United States against Candace Owens over the claim that the first lady was born male.
The legal action stems from a Owens’ ongoing reporting that the 72 year old is not a woman. The 219-page suit criticizes Owens for peddling what is called “outlandish, defamatory and far-fetched fictions… to promote her independent platform, gain notoriety, and make money.”
On Tuesday’s show, Megyn was joined by MK True Crime commentators Arthur Aidala and Mark Eiglarsh to discuss the defamation case and how difficult it might be for the Macrons to win.
The Lawsuit
The Macrons are being represented by top defamation attorney Tom Clare in the 22-count lawsuit filed in Delaware Superior Court on July 23. In a statement, Clare alleged Owens has broadcast “a relentless year-long campaign of defamation against the Macrons.”
The complaint cites a March 2025 YouTube video Owens posted for her 4.5 million followers titled “Is France’s First Lady a Man?”, her six-part “Becoming Brigitte” series, and other content promoting the conspiracy theory that Macron’s wife was born a man under the name Jean-Michel Trogneux and then transitioned to become a woman.
Clare told CNN the lawsuit marked a “last resort” after the Macrons legal team asked Owens to stop making the claim for about a year. According to the complaint, they provided Owens with “incontrovertible evidence disproving her allegations and proving, among other things, that Mrs. Macron was born a woman named Brigitte Trogneux, that she is not a blood relative of President Macron,” and that the Macrons are not being controlled or blackmailed by a CIA-linked program.
A representative for Owens, meanwhile, accused the Macrons of trying to “bully journalists” and said she will not back down. “Candace Owens is not shutting up,” the statement read. “This is a foreign government attacking the First Amendment rights of an American independent journalist.”
Legal Analysis
Megyn admitted she has not followed Owens’ coverage, but her producers have reviewed all of it. “They have nothing against Candace, but they did say it’s thin, it’s disjointed, it’s hard to follow at times, and it sounds a lot like conspiracy,” she noted. “But some of the conspiracies that we’ve criticized in the past have come true. I don’t know whether this will be one of them.”
Regardless, Megyn said she believes Owens believes what she is saying – and that could prove problematic for the Macrons who already have a very high standard to prove defamation as public figures. “What they are going to have to prove is that Candace knew it was false or recklessly disregarded that it appeared to be false,” she noted. “And I will say this in her defense: I believe she is a true believer.”
That leaves the “reckless disregard” piece, which Aidala said is not a slam-dunk for the Macrons either. “She knows what these laws are,” he said. “She was put on notice… months ago… and she still disregarded that. So, she must have something… that she believes she is holding on to that makes sense and that will clear her in any lawsuit.”
Based on the claims Eiglarsh has seen, he believes Owens “is so close to the line, if not over it” because of the way she has reported the theory. “It’s one thing to just say someone looks like a man. That’s… offensive but protected. It’s another thing to say, ‘Maybe this happened, maybe that happened,'” he explained. “But she is coming out with a statement and then trying to come up with some theory to back it up.”
“In one respect… what she is saying doesn’t have to be true. It just has to be not a reckless disregard of the truth,” he added. “So, if she has theories to back it up, then okay. But if that is the best she’s got, it seems completely half cocked – pun intended.”
As Megyn explained, “the best case scenario for Candace is [her claims are] true and these people are lying about it because they don’t want to be humiliated.” Short of that, legal experts Megyn spoke to say the location of the filing – Delaware Federal Court – benefits the Macrons. “I’ve spoken to a bunch of defamation attorneys and most of them say this is not ideal for her,” she noted. “But there will be a question about whether the Macrons want to see this thing through to trial.”
You can check out Megyn’s full interview with Aidala and Eiglarsh by tuning in to episode 1,122 on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you like to listen. And don’t forget that you can catch The Megyn Kelly Show live on SiriusXM’s Triumph (channel 111) weekdays from 12pm to 2pm ET.