Macron v. Owens: Analyzing Candace Owens’ Motion to Dismiss

Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron have sued Candace Owens in Delaware over her “Becoming Brigitte” series, and now that all the moving papers on the motion to dismiss are available, California attorney Nick Brooks walks you through what they really say and what’s at stake. The Macrons claim Owens told her audience that Brigitte was actually born male, is secretly her brother Jean‑Michel Trogneux using a stolen identity, and that the couple committed identity theft, fraud, incest, and were tied to CIA‑style conspiracies and violence against journalists—allegations they say are categorically false.

In this video, Nick breaks down Owens’ motion to dismiss, the Macrons’ opposition, and the reply, focusing on personal jurisdiction over Owens, Delaware’s long‑arm and manager‑consent statutes, and how her Delaware entities factor into that analysis. He also examines Owens’ statute of limitations and forum non conveniens arguments—especially her attempt to import France’s three‑month defamation period through Delaware’s borrowing statute—and explains why timing may be more dangerous for the Macrons than jurisdiction. You’ll hear how the amended‑complaint and Rule 15 issue could lead the judge to strike some allegations rather than kill the case, why targeted jurisdictional discovery would undercut Owens’ effort to avoid scrutiny of her business model, and a prediction about what the Delaware court is likely to do at this motion‑to‑dismiss stage.