A federal judge has determined that former U.S. Senator
U.S. District Judge David A. Bragdon issued the ruling on Friday, dismissing Sinema’s motion to have the case thrown out due to a lack of jurisdictional connection to North Carolina. While Sinema argued that she held no ties to the state, the court found that nine text messages sent to
Legal Basis for the Alienation of Affection Claim
North Carolina remains one of the few jurisdictions in the United States that permits jilted spouses to pursue civil litigation against a third party for the breakdown of a marriage. The lawsuit, filed by Heather Ammel, seeks financial damages, alleging that Sinema pursued a romantic relationship with her husband despite being aware of his marital status. According to the complaint, the couple shared a stable and loving relationship prior to the alleged interference.
Matthew Ammel, a retired Army veteran, joined Sinema’s security team in 2022, a role that required him to accompany the then-senator on various domestic and international trips. The lawsuit claims that in early 2024, Heather Ammel discovered explicit messages exchanged between her husband and Sinema via the encrypted messaging platform Signal. The filing further alleges that by the summer of 2024, Matthew Ammel had ceased wearing his wedding ring, and Sinema had appointed him to a position as a national security fellow in her Senate office while he continued his duties as a security contractor.
Testimony and Current Status
During a deposition conducted in July, Sinema acknowledged the romantic nature of the relationship. She testified that the pair’s interactions became sexual in May 2024 during a trip to Napa, California. She further stated that they engaged in sexual encounters in several other locations, including New York, Washington, Colorado, and Arizona, but explicitly denied that any such encounters took place within North Carolina. Matthew and Heather Ammel officially separated on November 1, 2024.
Representatives for Sinema have not yet provided a formal response to the judge’s decision. The case will now proceed, marking a significant development in the application of North Carolina's alienation of affection laws to public figures with limited physical presence in the state.
