Supporters of Marine Le Pen and the National Rally argue that the appeal to the Court of Cassation is a necessary step to ensure a fair and impartial judicial process. They contend that the initial trial was influenced by political motivations rather than purely legal considerations. By escalating the case to the highest court, the party is exercising its fundamental right to challenge a verdict they believe is based on a misinterpretation of how parliamentary work is conducted.
From this perspective, the work performed by the assistants in question was vital to the party's operations and was consistent with the duties expected of such roles. Proponents argue that the legal system is being weaponized to weaken a major political opposition force, potentially disenfranchising millions of voters who support the National Rally's platform. They view the attempt to bar Le Pen from public office as an undemocratic measure that seeks to remove a popular candidate through the courts rather than the ballot box.
Furthermore, supporters emphasize that the party has always operated within the bounds of what they understood to be acceptable administrative practice. They argue that the complexity of European Parliament rules often leads to misunderstandings that should not be treated as criminal offenses. By seeking a review from the Court of Cassation, the party is standing up for its members and staff, insisting that the judiciary must remain independent of political pressure and that the presumption of innocence should be upheld until all legal avenues are exhausted.