At the beginning of his divorce, Ohio Republican Congressman Max Miller flipped a switch and quickly went from magnanimous to aggressive, setting the tone for the nasty custody fight he’s now embroiled in.
On August 27, 2024, Congressman Miller filed his initial complaint.
That complaint dedicated one sentence to custody, “Plaintiff be awarded temporary and permanent shared allocation of parental rights and responsibilities (shared parenting) of the parties minor child.”
The rest of the twenty-four-page document was dedicated to painstakingly protecting his assets, including submitting a copy of the prenuptial agreement he signed with wife Emily Moreno, daughter of US Republican Senator Bernie Moreno.
Details of custody were left to a separate document filed on the same day. That twenty-four-page document was vague and light on details. Nowhere did Congressman Miller accuse Ms. Moreno of being unfit. On the contrary, he recommended she get physical custody and medical/educational decision-making.
Since physical custody along with decision-making authority are what 90% of custody fights are over, Congressman Miller ceded all major bones of contention.
Given his magnanimous stance, this custody case should have gone smoothly.
Instead, seven days later- on September 3, 2024- he filed an emergency motion demanding a temporary custody order. In it, he claimed that Emily was keeping their daughter away from him.
That emergency motion started with, “On August 1, 2024, the Defendant absconded with the parties nine (9) month old daughter, R.M., left the family residence, and moved into a new home in Westlake, Oh.”
While the statement was accurate, it is curious that none of these allegations were made in his previous motion filed only a week prior.
I reached out to the attorneys who drafted the emergency motion- Larry Zukerman and Pamela MacAdams- but they didn’t return an email for comment.
Congressman Miller’s Congressional office also didn’t return an email for comment.
The emergency motion went on to claim that Ms. Moreno was largely withholding their daughter, only allowing contact under strict rules, “While Defendant has ‘permitted’ Plaintiff to visit with R.M. at her home for short periods of time, these permitted ‘visitations’ have been 1) subject to Defendant’s exclusive discretion, 2) subject to Defendant’s ‘availability’, although the Defendant is not formally employed, and 3) limited in time and place unilaterally by the Defendant. As noted, the Defendant has refused to permit Plaintiff to have overnights with R.M. at his home on Wynwood and has refused to permit Plaintiff to visit with R.M. outside of her presence or a person designated by Defendant, Emily Miller. Defendant has likewise refused to permit any member of Plaintiff’s family to visit with R.M.”
Before there is a custody order, child custody can look like the wild west. Possession isn’t merely 9/10 of the law, but it is the law.
Since Ms. Moreno possessed the child, she made the rules.
Her draconian rules are consistent with rules that many men say vindictive and controlling women make, however, as we’ve since learned she may have had good reason.
On August 1, 2024, after she told Congressman Miller she was seeking a divorce, she alleged that he threw scalding water at her. She also told police later that he previously put a gun to her head.
These abuse incidents would have made for a great counterargument by Emily’s attorneys- Jill Helfman and Vince Stafford- however they chose to respond with an opposition which looked more like a press release.
Stafford and Helfman did not respond to emails for comment; Ms. Moreno has since switched lawyers. The attorneys filed this opposition on September 12, 2024.
Here is the key portion of the opposition.
Unlike Plaintiff, Ms. Miller is choosing not to make false allegations about her spouse and then list those allegations in a public document. Ms. Miller strenuously opposes the false statements contained in Plaintiff’s motion, which will be addressed more specifically at a hearing on this matter.
Ms. Miller has a great deal of concerns about her husband’s decision-making and personal life choices.
Congressman Miller then followed up on September 27, 2024, with dual motions- to appoint a guardian ad litem and psychological evaluator- by claiming that Emily Moreno was diagnosed with bi-polar.
Affiant further states that during Defendant’s pregnancy, this Affiant was informed by Defendant’s obgyn that medical records reflect a prior diagnosis of bi-polar disorder;
Affiant further states that he inquired about such of Defendant, and she acknowledged having been so diagnosed;
The OBGYN wasn’t named and if this event occurred it would have been a blatant violation of HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which requires strict non-disclosures of patient medical records, even to their spouses.
From there, the custody battle was on in full force and remains being fought today.
That does not mean Miller gets a free pass, and it does not mean Emily Moreno’s allegations should be ignored. Abuse claims, gun claims, scalding-water claims, custody filings, medical-record allegations, and the admitted release of private child images all deserve scrutiny. But family court also has its own species of predator: lawyers who gin up conflict, consultants who monetize trauma, evaluators who stretch cases, and political operatives who exploit divorce wreckage for power. The people pushing hardest on the fallout are not neutral guardians of women and children. Many are hardcore lefties waving Palestinian flags who would love to steal a safe Republican congressional seat by turning a family catastrophe into a political weapon. I do not trust any of these assholes. Not Miller’s camp. Not the lawyers. Not the consultants. Not the activists. Not the media scavengers. Follow the child, the money, the filings, and the incentives.