A judge has ruled that the court lacks personal jurisdiction over Candace Owens in a defamation lawsuit filed by French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte. The decision limits Owens’s direct liability in the case while allowing claims against her companies to proceed. The ruling does not dismiss the lawsuit entirely.
The Macrons sued Owens in 2025 over claims she made about Brigitte Macron’s gender. The case centers on statements Owens broadcast to her audience. The lawsuit sought to hold her accountable for those remarks under defamation law.
The court found it had jurisdiction over Owens’s business entities but not over Owens herself. That distinction means the companies remain defendants in the litigation. Owens is not subject to the court’s authority in her individual capacity. The judge’s order separates her personal liability from that of her corporate operations.
Jurisdictional questions often determine where and whether a defamation case can move forward. Courts must establish a sufficient connection between a defendant and the forum. Owens’s companies met that standard; she did not, according to the ruling.
The lawsuit reflects a growing trend of public figures pursuing defamation claims across borders. French law and U.S. law treat defamation differently, particularly regarding public figures. The jurisdictional split adds another layer of complexity to the proceedings.
Claims against Owens’s companies can continue in the same court. The scope of those claims will depend on how the businesses are structured and what role they played in publishing the statements. The Macrons may also pursue other legal options in different jurisdictions.
The ruling narrows the case against Owens personally but does not resolve the underlying defamation allegations. Litigation against her companies is expected to proceed. Further court filings will clarify the next steps in the dispute.
