French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte have opened a second front in their legal fight with American podcaster Candace Owens, filing a sweeping new defamation lawsuit in Tennessee that lists 88 separate counts and accuses her of building a profitable media franchise on claims they say are false.

The case was filed on Wednesday, November 4, 2026, in the US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, eight days after a Delaware judge ruled the Macrons could not sue Owens personally there because she lives in Tennessee. The French first couple have now taken the fight to her home state — and expanded it from 22 counts to 88.

Key Points

• Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron filed the new suit against Candace Owens on November 4, 2026, in the US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.
• The 400-plus-page complaint lists 88 counts of defamation, false light and defamation by implication, and seeks punitive damages, legal costs and a narrow injunction.
• The Macrons allege Owens republished false claims that Brigitte Macron was born male and that the couple are blood relatives.
• The filing follows a Delaware judge's October 27 ruling that the state lacked personal jurisdiction over Owens, who lives in Tennessee.
• Owens confirmed the new suit on X on November 9, writing that the Macrons had filed "a NEW set of claims against me. 88 in total."

What Happened

The Tennessee case is Macron v. Owens, No. 3:26-cv-01765, assigned to Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr. A summons was issued on November 5, one day after the complaint was filed. No ruling on the merits has been made: the claims are allegations, not judicial findings. The case is now the live front in a dispute that began with the Macrons' first lawsuit in Delaware in July 2025.

According to the complaint, Owens republished the disputed claims through her platform, including her eight-part podcast series "Becoming Brigitte", which launched a new season in September 2025, after the first suit was filed. The Macrons also point to a doll made to resemble Brigitte Macron. The complaint argues Owens used the material to promote her platform, gain notoriety and make money.

Background and Context

The Macrons first sued Owens in Delaware in July 2025, in a filing of more than 200 pages and 22 counts. They accused her of waging what their lawyers called a "campaign of global humiliation" built on false claims about Brigitte Macron's identity and the couple's relationship, and said she had ignored three demands to retract the statements before they went to court.

That case hit a jurisdictional wall on October 27, 2026, when Delaware Superior Court Judge Sheldon K. Rennie ruled that Delaware lacked personal jurisdiction over Owens herself. It allowed the case to continue, for now, against two Delaware-registered companies linked to Owens — Candace Owens LLC and GeorgeTom Inc. — while dismissing the claims against her individually.

The Macron Candace Owens Lawsuit in Tennessee

The choice of Tennessee is deliberate, and it changes the legal landscape for both sides. In Delaware, the Macrons had to argue that Owens' online activity created enough of a connection to the state for its courts to hear claims against her personally. In Tennessee, where she lives, that argument disappears: the court plainly has jurisdiction over a resident defendant, and the case can proceed against Owens herself rather than only against her companies.

The 88 counts cover three related legal theories: defamation, false light and defamation by implication. False light is a privacy claim alleging a person was portrayed in a misleading and offensive way. Defamation by implication covers statements that may be literally true in isolation but are presented in a way that creates a false impression. The Macrons argue the harm came from the overall picture, not just individual claims.

Reactions and Quotes

Owens herself confirmed the new lawsuit on Monday, November 9, posting on X: "The Macrons have indeed filed a NEW set of claims against me. 88 in total." She has previously framed the dispute as a free-speech fight, and her supporters have cast the Macrons' lawsuits as an attempt by a foreign head of state to silence an American commentator.

The Macrons, for their part, have consistently presented the case as a defence of the truth about Brigitte Macron's identity. Their complaint treats the disputed claims as a deliberate falsehood repeated for profit, not as a good-faith question or an opinion. Neither side has signalled any interest in a settlement.

Why It Matters

The Tennessee suit matters beyond the two parties because it tests how far American defamation law reaches when the plaintiff is a foreign head of state. Public figures in the United States face a deliberately high bar: they must show not only that a statement was false, but that the speaker knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The Macrons must clear it for each of the 88 counts if they want to win.

The case also matters as a test of platform-era defamation. Owens' claims reached millions of people through podcasts and social media, in a format blending commentary, interviews and serialised storytelling. The Macrons argue the format itself — an eight-part series, a doll, repeated episodes — turned a rumour into a sustained commercial product.

What Happens Next

The immediate next step is service and Owens' response. The summons was issued on November 5, and Owens will have a set period to file an answer or a motion to dismiss. Her lawyers are widely expected to challenge the complaint on First Amendment grounds and to argue that the statements at issue are protected opinion or fair comment on a public figure, rather than provably false statements of fact.

The Delaware case, meanwhile, remains alive against Owens' companies, with the French-law limitation question still unresolved. It is possible the two cases will proceed in parallel, or that the Delaware claims are eventually folded into the Tennessee action.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the Macrons sue Candace Owens again? A Delaware judge ruled on October 27, 2026, that Delaware lacked personal jurisdiction over Owens, who lives in Tennessee. The Macrons filed a new, larger suit in Tennessee.

How many counts are in the new lawsuit? The Tennessee complaint lists 88 counts of defamation, false light and defamation by implication, in a filing of more than 400 pages. The original Delaware suit had 22 counts.

What are the Macrons asking the court for? They seek damages, including punitive damages, their legal costs, and a narrow injunction against republishing any statement a court finds defamatory.

Has a court decided whether Owens defamed the Macrons? No. No ruling on the merits has been made in either case. The claims are allegations, and Owens is entitled to defend them in court.

Who is the judge in the Tennessee case? The case, Macron v. Owens, No. 3:26-cv-01765, is assigned to Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr. of the US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.

Read more: the Delaware ruling that set up the Tennessee filing, the Spanish edition of that ruling, and Macron under pressure at home as protests sweep France.