Have any credible sources or officials addressed rumors about Brigitte Macron's gender?
Executive summary
Credible officials and mainstream news organizations have repeatedly treated the claim that Brigitte Macron was born male as a baseless rumor and are documenting legal and criminal responses to its spread: the Macrons filed a 22‑count defamation suit in Delaware and a criminal complaint in Paris, and French prosecutors have pursued cyberbullying cases tied to those allegations [1] [2]. French courts have both convicted and later seen appellate decisions in related defamation cases, but Reuters emphasizes that courts have not ruled on Brigitte Macron’s gender itself — they ruled on defamation appeals and freedom-of-expression questions [3].
1. The official responses: lawsuits and criminal complaints
The Macron couple has pursued formal legal action in two jurisdictions: a July 2025 22‑count defamation lawsuit filed in Delaware against commentator Candace Owens alleging a “relentless year‑long campaign” spreading the claim, and a criminal complaint filed in Paris that triggered police investigations and arrests for cyberbullying tied to online posts about Brigitte Macron’s gender [1] [2].
2. Prosecutors and courts treating the claims as harassment, not a biographical fact
French prosecutors brought charges of cyberbullying and malicious online comments, putting ten people on trial in Paris for spreading “malicious comments” about the first lady’s gender and sexuality; prosecutors framed the social‑media posts as harassment with real harm to Brigitte Macron’s wellbeing [4] [1]. These proceedings demonstrate authorities are addressing the rumor as wrongdoing that can cause personal harm, not as a legitimate factual controversy [4].
3. Media and fact‑checking: mainstream outlets call it misinformation
Major outlets — including CNN, The New York Times, Le Monde and Reuters — have reported the story as a long‑running false rumor and tracked legal pushback; Reuters’ fact check explicitly notes the July 2025 Paris Court of Appeal decision dealt with defamation appeals and did not rule on the truth of the gender allegation itself [1] [2] [5] [3]. Coverage centers on the rumor’s origins, its amplification by fringe figures, and the official measures taken to combat it [5].
4. What courts have — and have not — decided
French courts have issued mixed procedural outcomes: a Paris court in 2024 found two women guilty of defamation and awarded damages, but a 2025 appeal court acquitted them on grounds linked to freedom of expression; importantly, Reuters stresses courts ruled on defamation/legal thresholds rather than adjudicating Brigitte Macron’s gender [3] [2]. Available reporting makes clear: courts have not issued a judicial factual determination stating “Brigitte Macron is X”; they have focused on defamation and expression law [3].
5. Sources and prominent individuals who amplified the rumor
Investigations and reporting trace the rumor to a 2021 viral video by freelance journalist Natacha Rey and a self‑described medium, which was then amplified by far‑right and conspiracy channels; Candace Owens revived the conspiracy in 2024 on social platforms and in a YouTube series, prompting the U.S. defamation suit [6] [1] [5]. News outlets characterize these amplifiers as propagating unfounded, transphobic theories rather than contributing credible evidence [6] [5].
6. Evidence offered by the Macrons — and media notes on “proof”
The Macrons’ U.S. complaint says they will present scientific proof, birth records and expert testimony to refute the allegations; news reports note the couple supplied childhood photos and documents in their legal filings [6]. However, Reuters and other mainstream fact checks caution that the legal rulings cited in online posts do not equate to a court determination about Brigitte Macron’s gender identity [3] [6].
7. Competing narratives and the limits of available reporting
Some outlets and commentators treat the tax‑database tampering episode and documentary segments as contributing to confusion and conspiracy narratives, while French authorities and the Élysée framed incidents (like the name change in a tax registry) as hacking or administrative bugs, not evidence of a hidden identity [7] [8]. There are competing legal outcomes and appeals pending, and reporting shows courts have been careful to distinguish rulings on defamation from factual verdicts about private biography [3] [8].
8. Bottom line for readers seeking a credible answer
Available, mainstream reporting and official actions treat the claim as misinformation and harassment rather than a substantiated fact: authorities have pursued harassment and defamation cases, the Macrons have sued in the U.S., and reputable fact‑checks note courts did not rule on Brigitte Macron’s gender [1] [2] [3]. If you are looking for a judicial or forensic declaration of Brigitte Macron’s gender, available sources do not mention any court or official that has issued such a factual finding independent of defamation or procedural rulings [3].