Marine Le Pen’s conviction caused a political firestorm. Here’s what actually happened.

PARIS — There’s been no shortage of political mudslinging since France’s Marine Le Pen was found guilty of embezzlement and sentenced to an immediate five-year ban from running for public office.

Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, the Kremlin, U.S. President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk have all weighed in — the latter going as far as describing the verdict as an act of the “radical left.”

Many of the reactions depicted the verdict as an antidemocratic attempt to bar an opposition candidate — and the current front-runner — from running for the French presidency in 2027.

But these talking points misrepresent what happened in a Parisian courthouse over the course of the grueling, months-long trial that ended with Le Pen’s conviction on Monday.

The French judicial council called for moderation, underlining in a statement that the fiery — and sometimes false — criticisms of the court system following the verdict could lead to “the independence of the judiciary gravely being thrown into question.”

Here’s what you need to know.

What were Le Pen and the National Rally accused of doing?

Le Pen, her party, the National Rally, and 24 codefendants were charged with misappropriating funds from the European Parliament meant to pay for parliamentary assistants and using that money to pay for party employees who did not work on EU-related business from November 2004 to January 2016.

The court estimated that the National Rally embezzled more than €4 million, €474,000 of which Le Pen was personally responsible for, first as an MEP and then later as party president.

In a ruling exceeding 150 pages, the three-judge panel that heard the case ruled that the party’s scheme allowed it to effectively bypass spending rules meant to even the playing field for French political parties.

All but one of the defendants, an accountant, were found guilty and handed fines, suspended prison sentences — all of which would be served under house arrest —and ineligibility bans of various lengths.

What evidence did prosecutors have … and how did the defendants respond?

Prosecutors put forward several pieces of particularly damning evidence during hundreds of hours of court proceedings.

They shared a text message that one assistant sent to Le Pen asking if he could be introduced to the MEP he was supposed to be working for — months after being hired. They also revealed that one purported assistant exchanged only a single text message with his supposed employer over the course of an eight-month contract.

In its ruling, the court stressed that its conclusion did not rely solely on the absence of proof of work. The judges also noted that some of the assistants’ tasks were incompatible with a full-time parliamentary assistant role — such as working as the party president’s personal aide or bodyguard. One of the defendants, Thierry Légier, was Le Pen’s bodyguard and her father Jean-Marie’s before that. He now appears to be party President Jordan Bardella’s bodyguard and was photographed shadowing him on Tuesday.

During the trial, the defense did not dispute the substance of the charges. Instead, it argued that the distinction between a politician’s work as a lawmaker and as a party member was artificial.

Le Pen’s lawyer acknowledged on Monday their strategy was “not crowned with success.”

Why are Le Pen and her allies in arms about the verdict?

In most cases in France, defendants can have their punishment temporarily lifted by appealing a verdict, at which point they return to being presumed innocent.

The prosecutors in Le Pen’s case argued — and the judges agreed — that her crimes were so grave that her ban on running for public office should be handed down immediately, regardless of whether she appeals.

The court’s decision was rare, but not unprecedented, and based on what it viewed as the gravity of the case and the risk of repeat offenses. Though Le Pen and many of her codefendants are no longer MEPs, the court argued that their refusal to acknowledge any wrongdoing hinted at the possibility they would once again misuse public funds while holding public offices.

The court took Le Pen’s presidential aspirations into account, stating that allowing “a person who has already been convicted to be a candidate” would cause a “major disruption to democratic public order.”

The result for Le Pen was that she was effectively barred from running in the next presidential election in 2027, which polling shows her leading in the first round of voting and with a realistic shot at winning the runoff.

Le Pen and her allies have framed Monday’s ruling as an attack on democracy, arguing that the court is depriving millions of voters of their preferred candidate before she has a chance to appeal.

“The system has brought out the nuclear bomb because we’re on the verge of winning,” Le Pen told members of her parliamentary group on Tuesday.

Just days before Monday’s ruling, France’s top constitutional court affirmed that ineligibility sentences were constitutional as long as they were “proportionate” to the offense.

Is there still a shot she can run for president in 2027?

Le Pen has appealed the verdict. A higher court would have to overturn Monday’s ruling before the election to allow her to run.

However, retrials typically come several months after the initial verdict, significantly narrowing Le Pen’s window of opportunity. There is no available recourse for defendants to speed things up and the gears of the country’s legal system are known to run slowly.

“There is a small path — it is certainly narrow,” she acknowledged in her first interview after the verdict on Monday.

Le Pen’s five-year ban will expire before the 2032 presidential race, at which point she will be 64.

Is Le Pen going to prison?

In addition to her ban from public office, Le Pen was sentenced to prison and fined €100,000.

However, she won’t be donning a jumpsuit anytime soon. Her four-year prison sentence — two years of which are suspended — would be served under house arrest. While the ban on running for office takes immediate effect, her appeal temporarily lifts the prison sentence and fine.

Le Pen can also continue to serve as a lawmaker unless new elections are called for, in which case she would not be allowed to run for reelection.

What’s next for the National Rally?

The party is still holding out hope for a legal lifeline for Le Pen. A petition to support her has been launched — though it’s unclear what purpose it will serve other than amassing email addresses — and party officials are hitting the airwaves to stir up outrage.

But if Le Pen is still unable to run, Bardella, her 29-year-old protégé, appears to be the party’s most likely candidate.

Despite his youth, Bardella could be a strong contender. A Toluna Harris Interactive poll conducted after Le Pen’s verdict found that up to 36 percent of respondents would back Bardella in the first round of a presidential election, putting him well ahead of the field.

Still, concerns about his lack of experience and his underwhelming performance in last year’s snap election have raised skepticism within his party about his ability to win a presidential contest.

Do the French really care about this?

Listening to Le Pen, Bardella and the rest of the National Rally, one would expect that the wrath of the French voting public to be at a tipping point.

“Millions of French people are indignant,” Le Pen said Monday.

“What is happening will push millions of people who do not vote for the National Rally to come and vote for the National Rally,” Bardella said Tuesday.

But early polling suggests little public outrage over the verdict.

A survey by pollster Odoxa found that 54 percent of respondents believed the ruling demonstrated that “French democracy works well because there is a separation of powers,” while an Elabe poll showed that 68 percent considered it “normal” for ineligibility sentences to take immediate effect.