French First Lady Brigitte Macron will present “photographic and scientific” evidence in a U.S. court to counter claims that she is male, according to her attorney.
The Macrons filed a defamation lawsuit in Delaware this July against American commentator Candace Owens, her company Candace Owens LLC, and GeorgeTom Inc. The suit alleges Owens spread false claims that Brigitte Macron was born male, claims the filing says were contradicted by extensive evidence.
Tom Clare, the Macrons’ attorney, said Brigitte finds the allegations “incredibly upsetting.” He told the BBC’s “Under Fire” podcast that the claims have become a distraction for French President Emmanuel Macron.
“When your family is under attack, it wears on you,” Clare said. “And he’s not immune from that because he’s the president of a country.”
Owens claimed last March that she “would stake [her] entire professional reputation” on the allegation that Brigitte is male. The complaint noted Owens’ reach, with nearly 7 million followers on X and more than 4 million YouTube subscribers.
“Owens has used this false statement to promote her independent platform, gain notoriety, and make money,” the lawsuit stated. It also alleged that Owens ignored credible evidence and instead elevated “known conspiracy theorists and proven defamers.”
The complaint said Owens expanded on the claim with short videos and an eight-part podcast series titled “Becoming Brigitte.”
Brigitte Macron’s official biography states she was born April 13, 1953, in Amiens, France. She married banker André-Louis Auzière in 1974 and had three children before meeting Emmanuel Macron in the early 1990s while teaching at Lycée La Providence. The couple married in 2007.
Clare confirmed to BBC that photographs showing Brigitte pregnant and raising her children exist. He said the Macrons will submit the images to the court, along with expert testimony “scientific in nature.”
“It is a process that she will have to subject herself to in a very public way,” Clare said. “But she’s willing to do it. She is firmly resolved to do what it takes to set the record straight.”
Owens’ attorneys filed a motion to dismiss, arguing the Delaware venue would cause “substantial financial and operational hardship,” since it does not relate to her businesses incorporated in the state. A hearing date has not yet been set.