In a courtroom in Ohio on Monday, Rep. Max Miller appeared via Zoom from Washington to address whether he breached a 2023 settlement agreement with his former girlfriend, former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham. The settlement barred both parties from publicly disparaging each other after Grisham accused Miller of abuse and Miller sued for defamation.
Judge issues injunction
After several hours of testimony, the judge issued a preliminary injunction ordering Miller and Grisham to take down a number of social‑media posts that could be seen as violating the agreement. Miller was questioned about a May 7 post on his X account that included an audio clip of Emily Moreno, his ex‑wife, allegedly admitting that Grisham’s claims were fabricated. Grisham testified the post damaged her reputation and disrupted the peace she sought after the settlement.
Miller’s defense
Miller told the court he never authored the posts and that his staff posted the material without his instruction. He emphasized that his congressional duties leave little time for personal social‑media management, stating, “I didn’t instruct them to do this, period. They just did it.” He also argued that the public accusations, even if untrue, can cause real reputational harm.
Additional allegations and custody battle
The hearing also touched on Miller’s ongoing custody dispute with his ex‑wife, Emily Moreno, the daughter of GOP Sen. Bernie Moreno. Emily Moreno has alleged that Miller held a gun to her when their daughter was an infant, claims Miller denies. Miller appeared in person last week for that separate custody case.
Media interviews scrutinized
During the hearing, Miller’s recent interviews with CNN’s Jake Tapper were examined. In one interview, Miller affirmed to Tapper that Grisham’s statements were false, a response Grisham’s lawyers say breaches the settlement. In another segment, Miller said he could not discuss details because of the agreement.
Grisham’s own posts
Grisham’s counsel pointed to an April 22 X post where Grisham wrote, “Today I feel broken over what so many men with money and power get away with over & over & over,” accompanied by a broken‑heart emoji. Grisham testified the post referenced broader national issues, including the ongoing fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein case, not Miller specifically.
Impact on Miller’s re‑election bid
The legal battle comes as Miller seeks a second term in a district President Trump won by more than ten points in 2024. Some Senate Republicans have called for Miller to step down, but Speaker Mike Johnson publicly backed his re‑election, calling him “a great member of Congress.” The injunction adds another hurdle for Miller as he navigates both legal challenges and a competitive political environment.
What’s next?
The court’s order requires both parties to remove the identified posts promptly. Failure to comply could result in further sanctions. Miller’s campaign has not indicated how it will address the injunction, but the outcome may influence voter perceptions as the 2026 midterm cycle approaches.
Original reporting: KRDO (Colorado Springs metro) — read the source article.
