What defamation suits has candace owens faced and what were the outcomes?
Executive summary
Candace Owens has been the target of a high-profile defamation lawsuit filed by French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron in Delaware in July 2025, accusing her of promoting an “outlandish, defamatory” campaign that Mrs. Macron was born male; the complaint totals 219 pages and was brought by Clare Locke, the firm behind Dominion’s $787.5m settlement [1] [2] [3]. Available sources do not mention any final judicial outcome from that suit as of the documents provided; reporting describes the suit’s filing, allegations, and Owens’ public responses but not a final verdict or settlement [3] [4] [2].
1. The Macron suit: allegations and legal muscle
The July 23, 2025 complaint lodged in Delaware accuses Owens and two corporate entities of running a “campaign of global humiliation,” alleging she repeatedly advanced the false claim that Brigitte Macron was born male and then doubled down after receiving retraction demands; the complaint alleges monetization of the claims, including merchandise, and cites an eight‑part series “Becoming Brigitte” as continued dissemination [3] [2] [1]. The Macrons retained Clare Locke, the firm that won Dominion’s record payout, signaling serious intent and substantial legal resources behind the claim [1] [3].
2. What plaintiffs say they proved — and what they still must prove
The complaint frames the conduct as demonstrably false and allegedly made with actual malice — a high standard in U.S. defamation law for public-figure plaintiffs — and alleges Owens ignored “detailed retraction demand” evidence that purportedly disproved her claims before publishing further material [2]. Sources emphasize the plaintiffs’ burden to show Owens knew statements were false or acted with reckless disregard for truth; the reporting notes the complaint’s length and documentary aims but does not report a court resolution in the materials provided [2] [4].
3. Owens’ response and strategic posture
Owens publicly dismissed the suit as “goofy” and framed the action as an attack on American free speech; she vowed to fight and promised to bring high-profile allies into the fray, including saying Donald Trump “could be deposed” in related litigation narratives [4] [5]. Reporting also details Owens’ continuation of the disputed series and merchandise after receiving a December retraction demand, which the Macrons’ filings say shows a motive to profit from controversy [2] [3].
4. Wider context: why this suit matters beyond the parties
News outlets and analysts frame the Macron suit as a test of how modern influencers’ monetized misinformation intersects with traditional defamation law, and note Clare Locke’s involvement as part of a broader trend of high‑stakes defamation litigation against media figures [1] [3]. Commentators compare Owens’ public trajectory to other cases where repeated falsehoods resulted in costly litigation, suggesting potential industry‑wide implications if the Macrons succeed [6] [1].
5. Other defamation suits involving Owens — what’s on record
Available sources in the provided set focus on the 2025 Macron lawsuit and do not list other defamation suits against Owens in detail; Wikipedia and Britannica entries summarize the Macron filing as the key recent defamation litigation involving her [7] [8]. Sources do note Owens previously prevailed in a separate matter in 2022 when a suit by a different plaintiff was dismissed and resulted in a judgment in her favor, but the current search results emphasize the Macron case as the principal, active defamation action reported here [7].
6. What’s missing from current reporting and next steps to watch
The documents and articles provided do not report a final judgment, settlement, or dismissal of the Macron suit; they cover the complaint, plaintiff claims, and Owens’ responses but not an outcome [3] [2] [4]. Key things to watch in future reporting: whether Delaware courts find the plaintiffs satisfied the “actual malice” standard, any damages awarded, and whether the case prompts procedural rulings about cross‑border reputation disputes [1] [2].
Limitations and competing perspectives: reporting from The Guardian, BBC, TIME, Fortune and others catalog the Macrons’ factual claims and legal posture and note Owens’ defiant public stance; they differ in emphasis — some stress legal peril and Clare Locke’s pedigree [1] [3], others foreground Owens’ free‑speech framing and willingness to litigate [4] [5]. Available sources do not provide a court resolution or definitive legal outcome for the Macron suit as of the materials provided [3] [2] [4].