Judge Hears Arguments in Owens Defamation Case
A Delaware court considers a motion to dismiss a defamation suit filed against commentator Candace Owens.
Updated on Oct. 20, 2026 in Law
Live Poll
Should foreign officials be allowed to use U.S. courts to sue international commentators for defamation?
A Delaware judge heard arguments regarding a motion to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed by Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron against Candace Owens. The court did not issue a ruling on the motion, which challenges the jurisdiction of the Delaware court.
Why it matters
The lawsuit centers on claims made by Owens regarding the background of Brigitte Macron, with the plaintiffs filing in Delaware to leverage the state's longer statute of limitations. The legal proceedings remain in a preliminary stage as the court weighs jurisdictional and choice-of-law arguments.
Delaware law permits a two-year window for filing defamation claims, significantly longer than the three-month deadline established under French law. The court is currently evaluating whether personal jurisdiction exists over Candace Owens in the state.
The players
Candace Owens
Candace Owens is a political commentator and media personality who operates primarily from Tennessee.
Emmanuel Macron
Emmanuel Macron is the President of France and one of the plaintiffs in the ongoing defamation litigation.
Brigitte Macron
Brigitte Macron is a French educator and the wife of the French President who is a plaintiff in the defamation case.
Sheldon K. Rennie
Sheldon K. Rennie is the Delaware Superior Court judge presiding over the motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
The details
Attorneys argued over whether Owens has sufficient personal connections to Delaware to be held liable there, despite her business entities being incorporated in the state. Judge Sheldon K. Rennie questioned legal teams on whether the case should be governed by French, Tennessee, or Delaware statutes.
Timeline
The Macrons filed the defamation lawsuit in July 2025.
The court held a hearing on the dismissal motion in October 2026.
Political Context
The plaintiffs chose to file in Delaware to benefit from the state's longer statute of limitations compared to French law. Critics of such filings often argue that forum shopping forces defendants to litigate in jurisdictions where they have limited personal presence.
If the court rejects the jurisdictional challenge, the case will proceed to discovery and potentially public testimony. Residents should note that the outcome may set a precedent for how international defamation suits are handled within the Delaware court system.
The takeaway
This case highlights the complexities of jurisdiction when public figures pursue litigation across international borders. Parties must consider how filing location impacts both the timeline for legal recourse and the specific statutes of limitations applied to their claims.
Further reading
For more information on current litigation trends, visit the Law section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by RadarOnline.
Live Poll
Should foreign officials be allowed to use U.S. courts to sue international commentators for defamation?
