Sinema
(Photo
by
Kevin
Dietsch/Getty
Images)
Kyrsten
Sinema
spent
her
lone
term
as
a
United
States
Senator
as
the
poster
child
for
main
character
syndrome.
From
the
ostentatious
outfits
to
the
carefully
contrived
contrarian
votes,
Sinema
made
sure
she
drew
more
attention
than
a
first-term
senator
customarily
earns.
Down
the
stretch,
it
appeared
as
though
Sinema’s
primary
motivation
was
landing
a
cushy
pharmaceutical
lobbying
job,
so
it
wasn’t
a
surprise
when
she
eschewed
a
continued
political
career
to
join
Hogan
Lovells
in
one
of
those
“not
a
lobbyist
but
doing
all
the
work
a
company
expects
from
a
lobbyist”
roles
popular
among
former
officials.
A
nice
paycheck
to
no
longer
be
the
star
of
the
show.
Alas,
it
seems
that
her
post-Senate
life
remains
just
as
bizarre
as
her
tenure
in
office.
As
noted
by
Law360,
Sinema
is
being
sued
in
North
Carolina
under
one
of
the
most
gloriously
archaic
torts:
alienation
of
affection.
Quite
the
glow-down
from
walking
the
halls
of
power
to
being
sued
under
a
legal
theory
that
makes
the
Rule
Against
Perpetuities
seem
like
a
TikTok
trend.
Alienation
of
affection
allows
a
spouse
to
sue
a
third
party
for
interfering
with
their
marriage.
It’s
a
relic
from
the
era
when
wives
were
considered
property
and
“stealing”
one
carried
legal
consequences.
Only
a
handful
of
states
still
recognize
it
(though
it
might
enjoy
a
comeback
once
this
administration
imposes
some
sort
of
a
trad
wife
mandate),
and
North
Carolina
is
one
of
those
states.
In
fact,
North
Carolina
has
a
fairly
active
alienation
of
affection
docket,
with
roughly
200
cases
per
year.
The
plaintiff
is
Heather
Ammel,
whose
husband
Matthew
Ammel
served
on
Sinema’s
security
detail
and
later
joined
her
Senate
staff
as
a
“Defense
and
National
Security
Fellow.”
According
to
the
complaint,
he
was
also
something
more.
According
to
the
verified
complaint
(via
CourtListener),
everything
allegedly
started
when
Sinema’s
former
head
of
security
warned
Mr.
Ammel,
then
a
member
of
the
detail,
that
she
worried
that
the
senator
was
“having
sexual
relations
with
other
security
members.”
Mr.
Ammel
chose
to
stay.
Then
the
messaging
ramped
up.
Plaintiff
discovered
messages
which
included
a
picture
of
Defendant
wrapped
in
a
towel;
Defendant
offered
to
help
Mr.
Ammel
work
through
his
mental
health
challenges
and
Mr.
Ammel
agreed;
Mr.
Ammel
stated
to
Defendant
he
was
intimidated
by
her
and
Defendant
asked
why
because
she
only
wants
to
be
intimidating
to
her
opponents,
not
to
people
she
likes;
Defendant
suggested
for
Mr.
Ammel
to
bring
MDMA
drugs
on
a
work
trip
so
that
she
could
guide
him
through
a
psychedelic
experience.
The
psychedelic
stuff
would
seem
an
impossible
stretch
except
Sinema
has
already
discussed
knowing
about
Mr.
Ammel
taking
a
psychedelic
substance
for
treatment.
In
March
2025,
Sinema
talked
to
the
Phoenix
New
Times
about
her
advocacy
for
psychedelic
drug
research
and
explicitly
told
the
story
of
Mr.
Ammel
going
to
Mexico
to
take
ibogaine
to
deal
with
migraines.
Somehow,
this
isn’t
even
the
first
notable
story
involving
a
U.S.
Senator
and
ibogaine.
Except
this
one
is
real.
Ibogaine
in
Mexico
is,
of
course,
not
the
same
as
MDMA
on
a
work
trip,
but
an
allegation
that
seemed
wildly
bizarre
at
first
blush
at
least
has
some
context.
By
June
2024,
Mr.
Ammel
had
stopped
wearing
his
wedding
ring.
The
complaint
alleges
Ammel
told
his
wife
“it
was
best
for
‘public
optics’
so
it
wouldn’t
look
like
Defendant
was
putting
her
hands
on
a
married
man
when
they
were
out
at
concerts
and
various
other
public
events.”
There
are
no
flags
red
enough
for
this.
The
complaint
alleges
that
the
following
months
involved
a
lot
of
travel
and
a
lot
of
Mr.
Ammel
staying
alone
with
the
senator.
The
whole
thing
reads
like
a
reverse
Hallmark
movie
where
the
small
town
man
decides
to
give
it
all
up
for
the
big
city
career
woman.
In
October
2024,
soon
after
Mr.
Ammel
returned
home
to
Moore
County,
North
Carolina,
after
being
away
with
Defendant
on
another
work
trip,
Defendant
messaged
Mr.
Ammel
stating,
“I
miss
you.
Putting
my
hand
on
your
heart.
I’ll
see
you
soon.”
Plaintiff
responded
to
the
message
stating,
“are
you
having
an
affair
with
my
husband?
You
took
a
married
man
away
from
his
family.”
Golly.
Hard
to
imagine
that
a
woman
who
posted
pictures
of
herself
wearing
a
“Fuck
Off”
ring
while
her
colleagues
urged
her
to
help
struggling
workers
could
be
callous
to
someone
else’s
pain.
The
Ammels
separated
in
2024.
The
complaint
says
Mr.
Ammel
removed
the
last
of
his
belongings
from
the
house
in
September
2025.
While
the
complaint
alleges
that
Mr.
Ammel
and
Sinema
had
an
affair
—
indeed,
the
complaint
alleges
that
it’s
still
ongoing
—
that’s
not
even
necessary
to
establish
a
basic
claim
of
alienation.
It
just
requires
a
third
party
knowingly
engaged
in
conduct
leading
to
the
loss
of
marital
affection.
The
soon-to-be
former
Mrs.
Ammel
also
brings
a
claim
for
punitive
damages
alleging
that
Sinema’s
actions
were
“willful,
wanton,
intentional,
malicious,
and
in
reckless
disregard
of
Plaintiff’s
marital
rights.”
Alienation
of
affection
is,
to
be
clear,
a
very
stupid
tort.
It’s
an
awful
carryover
from
an
era
when
married
women
were
treated
as
chattel.
That
said,
there’s
oodles
of
topsy-turvey
here.
It’s
a
claim
brought
by
the
wife
and
the
alleged
other
woman
is
the
more
powerful
one
in
the
supposed
extramarital
relationship.
It’s
the
sort
of
fact-pattern
that
19th
century
state
legislators
would
have
shuddered
to
think
this
claim
might
cover.
Maybe
a
certain
Biglaw
firm
will
lobby
the
North
Carolina
legislature
for
some
very,
very
specific
tort
reform.
(Full
complaint
available
on
the
next
page…)
Sinema
Sued
Under
Rare
Law
By
Her
Former
Guard’s
Ex-Wife
[Law360]
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.