Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: What are some examples of misinformation spread by Candace Owens about public figures?
Executive Summary
Candace Owens has been publicly accused of promoting a false and defamatory claim that France’s First Lady, Brigitte Macron, was born male; the allegation prompted a US defamation lawsuit and the Macrons’ pledge to present photographic and scientific evidence to refute it, with reporting on these developments appearing in September 2025 [1] [2] [3]. Separately, Owens has made sharp personal claims about actress Blake Lively, described as calling Lively the “rudest person she'd ever worked with,” though that remark appears in entertainment reporting with limited corroboration and context as of December 2025 [4].
1. How the Macron allegation was framed and repeated — and why it matters
The central, repeated claim documented in September 2025 is that Brigitte Macron was born male, which outlets characterize as baseless and defamatory and which the Macrons' legal team says has caused personal and reputational harm [1] [2]. Reports indicate Owens has reiterated the theory publicly enough to prompt formal legal action, and the Macron legal filings and statements frame the statements as not only false but emotionally upsetting and distracting to the French presidency, signaling the couple’s legal posture that the repetition of the claim constitutes actionable defamation [2] [5].
2. The Macrons’ legal response and promised evidence
French and US reports from September 18–19, 2025 state the Macrons intend to present photographic and scientific proof and expert testimony in US court to demonstrate Brigitte Macron is a woman, and they have filed suit in response to Owens’ statements [1] [3] [5]. Owens’ team responded by filing a motion to dismiss, indicating that legal arguments about jurisdiction, protected speech, or factual disputes are being advanced by both sides; the published accounts emphasize the plaintiffs’ commitment to documentary and expert evidence rather than solely rhetorical rebuttals [3] [1].
3. Timeline: when claims, coverage, and legal steps occurred
Coverage in the available reporting clusters in mid- to late-September 2025, with multiple outlets publishing accounts on September 18–19, 2025 documenting both the allegedly false claim and the Macrons’ legal countermeasures [1] [2] [5]. The convergence of dates shows the matter moved quickly from online allegation to litigation within at least that month. The temporal concentration of reporting suggests the claim had sufficient circulation by mid-September 2025 to spur coordinated legal and media responses from the Macron side [1].
4. Other public-figure claims by Owens: the Blake Lively example
An entertainment piece dated December 2, 2025 records Owens describing Blake Lively as the “rudest person she'd ever worked with,” a personal-character claim that could influence public perception during legal disputes involving Lively according to the reporting [4]. The cited item provides limited corroboration about the underlying interactions or sources beyond Owens’ statement and frames the remark as potentially consequential amid Lively’s legal context; unlike the Macron allegation, this is presented as a personal appraisal rather than an assertion of factual identity and lacks the immediate legal counteraction reported in the Macron matter [4].
5. How media outlets presented the claims and possible agendas
The available reports come from a mix of mainstream and entertainment outlets, each emphasizing different elements: some focus on defamation and legal consequence for the Macron allegation, while entertainment coverage highlighted the salaciousness of personal attacks on celebrities [2] [3] [4]. The consistency across multiple September 2025 reports that the Macron claim is baseless and has prompted litigation suggests a journalistic consensus about its seriousness, whereas the Blake Lively remark appears in context as provocative commentary with limited verification, reflecting varied editorial priorities and potential incentives to amplify controversy [1] [2] [4].
6. What is established fact vs. dispute in these episodes
Established facts in the available material include that Owens publicly alleged Brigitte Macron was male, the Macrons filed or threatened defamation litigation and said they would present scientific and photographic evidence, and Owens’ legal team moved to dismiss—these are reported with dates in September 2025 [1] [3] [5]. By contrast, the underlying truth of the Macron allegation is presented by outlets as false and contested, and the Blake Lively characterization is a subjective claim reported without corroborating evidence; the records show legal and reputational stakes rather than judicial finality as of those publication dates [1] [4].
7. Bottom line for readers tracking misinformation and accountability
The documented examples show two modes of claims by Owens: a factual allegation about identity that led to a formal defamation response from the reputed target, and a personal attack reported in entertainment coverage with less evidentiary follow-up [1] [4]. Readers should note the September 2025 clustering of legal reporting, the Macrons’ stated plan to present expert proof, and the distinction between demonstrably false identity assertions with legal consequences and unsourced personal insults amplified by media interest; these differences matter for assessing misinformation, harm, and accountability [2] [1].