Paris (Wen Desk): The judicial system in France is currently engaged in a landmark case concerning the limits of free speech and the proliferation of disinformation in the digital era, with ten individuals facing trial in Paris for online harassment targeting the nation’s First Lady, Brigitte Macron. This courtroom battle represents the latest, and perhaps most significant, phase in a protracted transnational legal campaign by the presidential couple to combat a pervasive and deeply offensive conspiracy theory alleging that Madame Macron was assigned male at birth.
The unsubstantiated claim, which suggests the First Lady is a transgender woman named Jean-Michel Trogneux (the name of her elder brother), first emerged following President Emmanuel Macron’s electoral victory in 2017. It has since been relentlessly disseminated, primarily by far-right and conspiracy theory circles across various social media platforms.
The French Prosecution: Cyber-Harassment Charges
The criminal trial in Paris is centred on charges of online harassment, a distinct legal action from the simultaneous defamation proceedings the Macrons have launched elsewhere. The ten defendants, comprising eight men and two women aged between 41 and 60, face severe penalties if convicted, including up to two years in prison.
Prosecutors have detailed the nature of the online abuse, accusing the individuals of sharing and promoting “malicious” and “insulting” posts regarding the First Lady’s gender and sexuality. Disturbingly, some comments allegedly extended to the couple’s significant age difference—a 24-year gap—by equating their marriage to “paedophilia,” thereby intertwining the gender conspiracy with a separate form of character assassination.
Key figures among the accused highlight the varied backgrounds involved in the dissemination of the fake news:
“Among the defendants is Aurélien Poirson-Atlan, a 41-year-old publicist active online under the pseudonym Zoé Sagan and often linked with conspiracy theory circles. Also facing trial is Delphine J., a 51-year-old self-proclaimed spiritual medium who previously uploaded a four-hour YouTube interview in 2021 repeating the core false claims.”
The legal history surrounding Delphine J. (who uses the pseudonym Amandine Roy) is complex. She and another individual were initially found guilty of defamation in a separate case in 2024, only for the conviction to be overturned on appeal, a ruling which did not validate the claims but determined the case did not meet the legal definition of defamation. That original ruling has since been taken to France’s highest court.
A Transatlantic Legal Battle
The Paris trial is proceeding in parallel with a major defamation lawsuit filed by the Macrons in the United States in late July. This action specifically targets conservative podcaster Candace Owens, whose video series titled “Becoming Brigitte” is accused of amplifying the “verifiably false and devastating lies” to a global audience for profit and attention.
The U.S. lawsuit characterises the sustained false narrative as a “campaign of global humiliation” and “relentless bullying on a worldwide scale.” The French prosecution noted the direct link between the U.S. media figure and the French defendants, stating that several of the individuals currently on trial in Paris had actively shared or reposted Owens’ videos and related content. In one alarming instance, a defendant allegedly claimed that “2,000 people were ready to go door to door” in the Macrons’ hometown of Amiens to conduct a personal “investigation” into the veracity of the rumours.
The Macrons’ legal team in the U.S. has announced plans to present “scientific evidence and photos” to the court, a demonstration of the extreme measures being taken to definitively and publicly refute the baseless gender allegations.
Conclusion: Redefining Digital Defamation
This dual-jurisdiction legal action taken by President and Madame Macron signifies a determination to draw a clear line against the spread of malicious digital falsehoods targeting public figures. The French prosecution explicitly stated that the trial aims to “reaffirm the boundaries of online speech and defamation in the digital age.”
The trial in Paris is more than a simple harassment case; it is a critical test of whether existing legal frameworks are sufficient to protect individuals, even those in the highest political office, from the unprecedented speed and reach of online conspiracy theories. The First Lady’s decision to pursue this matter vigorously, stating her desire to “set an example so other people would not suffer in the same way,” underscores the severe personal impact of these long-running, unfounded attacks. The final verdicts in both the French and American courts will send a powerful, internationally recognised message regarding accountability for the production and promotion of character-damaging disinformation.
