Candace Owens Claims Brigitte Macron’s Plotted $1.5M Assassination, The Explosive Allegations Escalating a Defamation Case
What started as a defamation lawsuit over transgender conspiracy theories has exploded into international headlines with shocking new allegations. Conservative commentator Candace Owens now claims French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron authorized a $1.5 million assassination plot against her—a claim that has no verified evidence but marks a dramatic escalation in an already explosive legal battle.
The accusations come as the Macrons’ 22-count defamation lawsuit against Owens continues in Delaware Superior Court, where they’re seeking substantial damages for what they call a “relentless campaign” of false claims that Brigitte Macron was born a man.
The Assassination Claims: What Candace Owens Says Happened
On November 22, 2025, Owens posted on X (formerly Twitter) that she’d been warned by “a high-ranking employee of the French Government” about an alleged assassination plot. According to her claims:
- The Macrons allegedly paid $1.5 million for her assassination
- France’s elite National Gendarmerie Intervention Group (GIGN) was supposedly involved
- The alleged hit squad included “one Israeli” operative
- She connected the claims to Charlie Kirk’s September 2025 murder, suggesting his alleged killer trained with France’s 13th Legion Brigade
- French journalist Xavier Poussard, who has published material about Brigitte Macron, could also be at risk
“This is deadly serious,” Owens wrote. “The head of state of France apparently wants us both dead and has authorized professional units to carry this out.”
Owens stated she informed “people in the Federal government” about the alleged plot and claimed she could provide “full details, as well as the name of the assassins and international accounts in France and Canada through which money was exchanged.”
Related Lawsuit: James Hodges Lawsuit, Blind Veteran Arrested For Walking Cane, The James Hodges Lawsuit That Sparked National Outrage
Critical Context: Zero Evidence Provided
As of this writing, Owens has provided no verifiable evidence to support her assassination claims. French, Israeli, and U.S. authorities have not issued any official statements confirming or investigating these allegations.
The French government spokesperson did not respond to media requests for comment on the accusations.
The Original Lawsuit: What This Legal Battle Is Really About
The assassination claims emerged against the backdrop of a serious defamation case filed in July 2025. Here’s what the Macrons are actually suing Owens over:
The Core Allegations
The Macrons filed a 22-count lawsuit claiming Owens falsely stated that Brigitte Macron was born a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux, transitioned to become a woman, stole another person’s identity, and engaged in statutory rape of a young Emmanuel Macron.
The Evidence Against Owens’ Claims
The lawsuit includes extensive documentation disproving the transgender conspiracy theory:
- Birth announcements in local newspapers showing Brigitte was born female
- Photographs of Brigitte as a young girl
- Medical records showing she gave birth to three children with her first husband
- Photos of Brigitte and her brother Jean-Michel Trogneux appearing together at presidential events
- Voting records proving they are separate people who voted in different cities
The Timeline
- March 2024: Owens first promoted the conspiracy theory while working at The Daily Wire
- June 2024: After being fired, she launched her independent podcast “Candace”
- December 2024: The Macrons sent their first retraction demand
- January 2025: Owens released an eight-part series “Becoming Brigitte” instead of retracting
- July 23, 2025: The Macrons filed their defamation lawsuit in Delaware Superior Court
- November 2025: Owens escalated with assassination plot allegations
Who Are the Key Players?
Emmanuel Macron
The 48-year-old President of France since 2017, who met his future wife when he was a high school student in her drama class.
Brigitte Macron
France’s First Lady, age 72, who was Emmanuel’s teacher when they met. She was 39 at the time; he was 15 (the age of consent in France). The couple maintained a legal relationship, married in 2007, and have faced conspiracy theories about their age gap since Emmanuel’s election.
Candace Owens
A 36-year-old conservative commentator with 4.5 million YouTube subscribers who has built a brand on controversial claims. She was denied visas to Australia and New Zealand in 2024 after making statements minimizing the Holocaust.
Tom Clare
The Macrons’ attorney, a prominent defamation lawyer representing the couple in Delaware court.
The Legal Claims: Defamation and False Light Explained
The Macrons’ lawsuit centers on two main legal theories:
Defamation
This occurs when someone makes false statements that harm another person’s reputation. To win, the Macrons must prove:
- Owens made false statements of fact (not opinion)
- The statements were published to third parties
- The statements caused reputational harm
- Owens acted with “actual malice”—meaning she knew the claims were false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth
False Light
This claim alleges Owens portrayed the Macrons in a highly offensive false manner that would be objectionable to a reasonable person, even if not technically defamatory.
Why Delaware?
The lawsuit was filed in Delaware because Owens’ company, GeorgeTom, Inc., is incorporated there, giving Delaware courts jurisdiction.
What Makes This Case Unique: International Defamation Law
Most defamation cases don’t cross international borders like this one. Here’s what makes it complicated:
U.S. vs. French Legal Standards
- In the U.S., public figures like the Macrons must prove “actual malice” under the landmark New York Times v. Sullivan case—a high bar to clear
- France has stricter defamation laws that offer more protection to plaintiffs
- The Macrons chose to sue in the U.S. despite facing a tougher legal standard
The First Amendment Defense
Owens’ spokesperson claimed the lawsuit is “a foreign government attacking the First Amendment rights of an American independent journalist.” However, the First Amendment doesn’t protect knowingly false statements made with actual malice against public figures.
Diplomatic Implications
A sitting head of state suing an American media figure is extremely rare and raises questions about international relations, free speech, and the limits of journalistic privilege.
The Macrons’ Evidence of “Actual Malice”
The lawsuit claims “overwhelming evidence” of actual malice, noting that Owens was sent a detailed retraction demand letter in December that “conclusively disproved” her claims, yet she produced an eight-part video series continuing to peddle false claims.
The complaint alleges Owens:
- Ignored credible documentary evidence (birth certificates, photos, medical records)
- Relied on sources previously convicted of defamation in France
- Monetized the content aggressively for financial gain
- Used the retraction demand as inspiration for more content rather than correcting the record
- Continued making claims after being shown they were false
Similar Cases: When Conspiracy Theories Meet Defamation Law
The Precedent in France
In September 2024, a French court found two of Owens’ sources—Amandine Roy and Natacha Rey—liable for libel for spreading false claims about Brigitte Macron. They were fined €500 and ordered to pay €8,000 to Mrs. Macron and €5,000 to her brother in civil damages.
An appeals court overturned the conviction in July 2025, though not because the statements were true—the court believed the defendants acted in “good faith.” Brigitte Macron has appealed to France’s highest court.
Other “Transvestigation” Cases
This isn’t the first time prominent women have faced baseless transgender conspiracy theories:
- Michelle Obama: False claims about the former First Lady persist despite being thoroughly debunked
- Kamala Harris: Subject to similar conspiracy theories during her vice presidency
- Brittney Griner: The WNBA star has faced “transvestigation” attacks
Researchers note these attacks typically target influential, politically left-leaning women who break gender stereotypes, particularly at times when conservative movements favor traditional gender roles.
What Could Happen Next? Potential Outcomes
If the Macrons Win
- Owens could be ordered to pay substantial damages (potentially millions of dollars)
- A court order requiring her to retract the statements
- Punitive damages for continuing to spread the claims despite evidence
- Legal precedent strengthening defamation protections for public figures
Tom Clare told CNN: “I’d like to thank her for that reaction to the lawsuit, she is only helping us with our claim for punitive damages by expressing no remorse and doubling down on these falsehoods.”
If Owens Wins
- The Macrons would have to prove they weren’t given adequate opportunity to respond
- Owens could claim vindication and likely monetize the victory
- Could embolden similar conspiracy theorists
Settlement Scenario
Most defamation cases settle before trial. Potential terms might include:
- Financial payment to the Macrons
- Retraction or correction statement
- Agreement to stop making future claims
- No admission of wrongdoing by either party
The Bigger Picture: Why This Case Matters
For Free Speech
The case tests the boundaries of the First Amendment. Can foreign leaders use U.S. courts to combat American commentators? Where’s the line between protected speech and defamation?
For Online Misinformation
The case highlights how conspiracy theories spread online and the real harm they cause to individuals, even when they seem absurd on their face.
For LGBTQ+ Rights
GLAAD describes “transvestigation” as an example of anti-LGBTQ online hate and disinformation. The case could set precedent for how such attacks are treated legally.
For International Relations
The lawsuit—and now assassination allegations—strain diplomatic relations between France and the U.S., particularly if Owens’ claims gain traction among her followers.
FAQ: Macron vs. Owens Legal Battle
What is Candace Owens being sued for?
The Macrons filed a 22-count defamation lawsuit against Owens for falsely claiming Brigitte Macron was born a man, transitioned, stole someone’s identity, and committed statutory rape.
Has Candace Owens provided evidence for her assassination claims?
No. As of November 2025, Owens has provided no verifiable evidence to support her claims that the Macrons paid $1.5 million to have her assassinated.
Where is the Macron lawsuit being heard?
Delaware Superior Court, because Owens’ company is incorporated in Delaware.
How much are the Macrons seeking in damages?
The lawsuit doesn’t specify an exact amount, but attorney Tom Clare indicated it would be “substantial” if Owens continues doubling down.
Can foreign leaders sue Americans in U.S. courts?
Yes. Anyone who suffers harm from defamation in the U.S. can file suit, regardless of nationality. However, they must meet U.S. legal standards, including proving “actual malice” for public figures.
What is “actual malice” in defamation law?
A legal standard requiring proof that the defendant either knew their statements were false or acted with reckless disregard for whether they were true or false.
Has Candace Owens retracted her claims?
No. She has refused three retraction demands from the Macrons and continues to stand by her allegations, even producing additional content after being presented with evidence disproving her claims.
What happened to Owens’ sources in France?
Two of her main sources were convicted of libel in France in 2024 and ordered to pay damages, though the conviction was overturned on appeal. The case is now before France’s highest court.
Could Owens face criminal charges?
The current lawsuit is civil, not criminal. However, making false reports to federal authorities about assassination plots could potentially carry separate legal consequences.
Your Rights: Understanding Defamation
If you’re facing defamation, here’s what you need to know:
For Public Figures
You must prove the defendant:
- Made false statements of fact
- Published them to others
- Caused you reputational harm
- Acted with actual malice
For Private Citizens
The standard is lower—you don’t have to prove actual malice, only negligence.
Defenses Against Defamation
- Truth (absolute defense)
- Opinion (protected speech)
- Privilege (statements in certain contexts like court proceedings)
- Consent (you agreed to the publication)
Time Limits
Most states have a 1-3 year statute of limitations for defamation claims. Act quickly if you’re considering legal action.
The Bottom Line
The dispute between the Macrons and Candace Owens represents a collision between free speech, conspiracy theories, international law, and the digital age’s amplification of misinformation. What began as unsubstantiated claims about France’s First Lady has escalated into assassination allegations, a major defamation lawsuit, and a test case for how courts handle online conspiracy theories.
As the Macrons stated in their complaint: “Ms. Owens’ campaign of defamation was plainly designed to harass and cause pain to us and our families and to garner attention and notoriety.”
Whether the courts agree—and what precedent this case sets for future disputes—remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: in an era where conspiracy theories can reach millions instantly, the legal system is struggling to keep pace with the damage they can cause.
Tracking this case? Bookmark this page for updates as the lawsuit progresses through Delaware courts and as more information emerges about Owens’ assassination claims.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah