Has candace owens been prosecuted for calling brigitte macron a man
Executive summary
Candace Owens has not been criminally prosecuted for calling Brigitte Macron a man; instead the Macrons have pursued civil litigation against her in the United States while a Paris court convicted ten French individuals for online harassment over similar claims [1][2][3]. Owens remains the defendant in a high‑profile U.S. defamation suit brought by President Emmanuel Macron and Brigitte Macron, and French judges have treated domestic sharers and originators of the false claim as criminally liable in France — but that judgment did not extend to Owens as a criminal defendant [2][3][1].
1. The legal posture: civil lawsuit in the U.S., criminal convictions in France
The Macrons filed a U.S. defamation complaint against Candace Owens and her related business entities, alleging she manufactured and amplified false statements that Brigitte Macron was born male; that case is a civil defamation action in Delaware, not a French criminal prosecution of Owens herself [3][4]. Separately, a Paris court found ten people guilty of cyber‑harassing Brigitte Macron for repeating the same false claims, handing down suspended sentences and at least one jail term for those French defendants [1][2].
2. What Owens is accused of and how she has responded
The Macrons’ U.S. complaint accuses Owens of amplifying a series of falsehoods — including that Brigitte Macron was born male and other related allegations — and frames those broadcasts as part of a “campaign of global humiliation”; Owens has publicly defended her coverage, saying she will not “shut up” and reiterating the theory on her platforms [4][5]. Fortune reporting frames the lawsuit as a direct existential threat to Owens’ media business, noting the plaintiffs engaged a high‑profile defamation firm and named Owens’ companies in the suit [3].
3. Why France prosecuted some posters but not Owens criminally
French prosecutors pursued people in France under cyber‑harassment laws for “particularly degrading, insulting and malicious” comments that targeted the first lady’s gender and sexuality; those prosecutions focused on individuals who posted or reshared content in France, and the Paris verdict was explicitly about online harassment by those defendants, not about Owens’ conduct in the U.S. [2][1]. Reporting indicates French courts viewed local perpetrators’ reposting and malicious commentary as criminally punishable, while the Macrons chose to pursue Owens through a civil defamation action in American courts rather than seek a cross‑jurisdictional criminal charge against an American media figure [6][3].
4. Competing narratives and incentives shaping the case
Observers warn that both legal strategies and media narratives carry political and financial incentives: the Macrons argue they are combating harms and setting a precedent against defamatory harassment, while critics — including some defendants in the Paris trial — say prosecutions impinge on free speech; meanwhile Fortune analysts suggest Owens’ provocative content model financially rewards amplification of conspiracy narratives, creating incentives to repeat and monetize such claims [1][2][3]. Owens has also accused the Macrons of trying to silence debate and has pushed counterclaims in media and social channels, a dynamic underscored across coverage [5][4].
5. What reporting does not establish and the immediate bottom line
Available reporting documents the Paris convictions of ten French individuals and the Macrons’ civil defamation suit against Candace Owens in the United States, but none of the cited sources reports a criminal prosecution of Owens herself in France or elsewhere; thus the factual bottom line is that Owens faces civil litigation and public condemnation, not criminal prosecution as of the cited reports [1][3][2]. If new filings or cross‑border criminal actions emerge, those would alter the legal landscape — the sources provided do not record any such development at this time [3][6].