Yes—Brigitte Macron plans to present scientific and photographic proof in the U.S. defamation case. Here’s what’s real, what’s not, and why it matters.
France’s First Lady will bring “scientific” evidence and personal photos—reportedly including images of her pregnant—into a Delaware courtroom as part of the Macrons’ defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens. That’s the plan, according to their attorney, Tom Clare, speaking about the strategy in remarks reported by multiple outlets. But one viral quote from Owens pushing back remains unconfirmed, and there’s a key correction the original story missed.
The most important correction: whose children are in those photos?
The original article said the photos would show Brigitte Macron “pregnant with their children,” implying children she shares with President Emmanuel Macron. That’s wrong.
- Correction: Any pregnancy photos would be of Brigitte Macron during her earlier pregnancies with her three children from a previous marriage—not the French president’s children. This is well-documented in mainstream profiles of Brigitte Macron. See: People magazine’s overview of her family background: https://people.com/brigitte-macron-children-parents-of-emmanuel-macron-7974116
That distinction matters. It’s a simple factual fix—and it’s exactly the kind of detail that gets warped when rumor becomes headline.
The core facts that hold up
Based on reporting from reputable outlets, these parts of the original story are solid:
- The plan for “scientific” and photographic evidence: Supported. Tom Clare said the expert testimony would be “scientific in nature,” and that Brigitte is prepared to show personal photos, including pregnancy images. These remarks were reported via the BBC’s Fame Under Fire podcast, as relayed by The Guardian and others. Source: The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/18/macrons-submit-scientific-evidence-us-court-prove-brigitte-not-man
- The case is in a U.S. court (Delaware): True. The Macrons filed a 22-count defamation suit in Delaware Superior Court on July 23, 2025. Source: CNBC https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/23/france-macron-brigitte-candace-owens-defamation-transgender-lawsuit.html
- Owens has moved to dismiss: Supported. Reports say her team seeks dismissal on jurisdictional grounds, arguing Delaware is not the proper venue. Source: The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/18/macrons-submit-scientific-evidence-us-court-prove-brigitte-not-man
- Owens’ repeated allegations and high-stakes rhetoric: True. The suit followed repeated claims by Owens, who said she would “stake [her] entire professional reputation” on the accusation. Source: CNBC https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/23/france-macron-brigitte-candace-owens-defamation-transgender-lawsuit.html
- The complaint’s language about “platforming known conspiracy theorists”: Supported and quoted in coverage of the filing. Source: CNBC (same link as above)
What needs caution (and why)
- Unverified Owens quote on X: The original article cites Owens responding, “Because she is one.” We could not locate that post directly on Owens’ feed, and major U.S. outlets did not link to a primary source. The phrasing appears in TMZ and a brief in the Times of India, but without a direct post. Until a link surfaces, treat it as unconfirmed. Source: TMZ (secondary) https://www.tmz.com/2025/09/18/brigitte-macron-woman-proof-candace-owen-defamation-lawsuit/
Transparency note: We checked Owens’ recent posts and searched archives but did not find the exact quote. If a primary link appears, we’ll update.
How we know what we know
- We relied on The Guardian’s reporting of Tom Clare’s comments to the BBC’s Fame Under Fire podcast. We couldn’t access the BBC podcast transcript or audio directly, but multiple outlets independently described the same quotes. The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/18/macrons-submit-scientific-evidence-us-court-prove-brigitte-not-man
- Court venue and filing details are corroborated by CNBC’s coverage of the Delaware suit. CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/23/france-macron-brigitte-candace-owens-defamation-transgender-lawsuit.html
- Background on similar rumors and litigation in France comes from RFI. Two women convicted in 2024 over spreading similar claims later had that ruling overturned on appeal in July 2025; the Macrons have appealed to France’s highest court. RFI: https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20240913-two-women-found-guilty-of-false-transgender-claims-against-france-s-first-lady-brigitte-macron
The bigger picture: a rumor that won’t die meets a court that can decide
This case is unusual for two reasons:
-
The evidence plan. Expert testimony “scientific in nature” is not typical in celebrity spats. It signals the Macrons are prepared to meet rumors with medical and expert-led proof—an extraordinary step for a first lady, and one their lawyer called upsetting but necessary.
-
The venue. Delaware Superior Court is a long way from Paris, but U.S. courts can provide powerful remedies against high-profile speech that crosses borders online. Owens’ motion to dismiss argues Delaware isn’t the place; the judge will decide.
Meanwhile, France offers context: courts there have wrestled with the same rumor cycle, convictions were overturned on appeal, and the legal wrangling continues. The U.S. case could become the most definitive test yet of whether repeated online allegations cross the line into defamation—especially when the target is a global public figure.
What “scientific evidence” likely means—and what we don’t know
- What’s confirmed: The Macrons will present expert testimony “scientific in nature,” plus personal photos, reportedly including pregnancy images.
- What’s not confirmed: The specifics of that science. No public filings detail which experts, what tests, or what records will be introduced. We’re not speculating beyond what the attorney said on the record.
What happens next
- The Delaware court will first weigh Owens’ motion to dismiss, including the jurisdiction argument.
- If the case proceeds, discovery could formalize the introduction of expert reports and personal records.
- Expect hard questions about credibility and harm—questions courts, not timelines, are designed to answer.
Key takeaways
- Verified: The Macrons plan to submit “scientific” expert evidence and pregnancy photos in their Delaware defamation suit against Candace Owens. [Guardian]
- Verified: The suit was filed July 23, 2025, in Delaware Superior Court; Owens has moved to dismiss. [CNBC]
- Correction: Any pregnancy photos would concern Brigitte Macron’s children from a previous marriage, not “their” children with Emmanuel Macron. [People]
- Caution: An alleged Owens quote on X (“Because she is one”) remains unverified; it appears in secondary outlets without a primary post link. [TMZ]
Links:
- The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/18/macrons-submit-scientific-evidence-us-court-prove-brigitte-not-man
- CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/23/france-macron-brigitte-candace-owens-defamation-transgender-lawsuit.html
- RFI: https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20240913-two-women-found-guilty-of-false-transgender-claims-against-france-s-first-lady-brigitte-macron
- People (background on Brigitte Macron’s children): https://people.com/brigitte-macron-children-parents-of-emmanuel-macron-7974116
- TMZ (secondary report on Owens’ alleged X post): https://www.tmz.com/2025/09/18/brigitte-macron-woman-proof-candace-owen-defamation-lawsuit/
Bottom line: The evidence plan is real. The Delaware case is real. One spicy clapback quote is not verified. And a quiet correction—that those pregnancy photos reflect Brigitte Macron’s earlier family life—may be the clearest lesson in how fast a rumor can bend a simple fact.