Stephanie Grisham files for temporary restraining order against Rep. Max Miller amid alleged abuse claims

Stephanie Grisham, a former White House communications director who served during President Donald Trump’s first term, has filed a request for a temporary restraining order against U.S. Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio), her attorney announced. The move follows allegations that Miller’s ex-wife reported abuse, which Grisham’s filing and the related civil case say are ongoing issues under dispute, The Hill reported on Aug. 4.

According to The Hill, Mark S. Zaid, Grisham’s counsel, said the filing was made as part of an ongoing lawsuit involving Miller and the allegations tied to his ex-wife. Zaid posted on X to say they had submitted papers seeking a temporary restraining order, describing it as a continuation of the broader case rather than a standalone matter.

The Hill’s report describes Grisham as seeking court protection through a restraining order while the underlying dispute continues to play out in litigation. It also reports that the request is intended to address alleged conduct attributed to Miller, with the temporary order serving as short-term relief while a longer legal process remains underway.

The filing comes amid attention on how federal elected officials can be affected by civil claims that proceed in parallel to any criminal enforcement that might be pursued separately. The restraining-order request, if granted, would be issued by a court and would be subject to judicial review through further hearings, filings, and any eventual resolution of the underlying case.

Details on what specific prohibitions Grisham is asking the court to impose, what dates the request targets, and whether a hearing has been scheduled were not included in the available reporting. Without a copy of the court docket entry or the restraining order application itself, the practical terms of any potential order cannot be confirmed from the information reviewed for this story.

Because the request is framed as a temporary restraining order, its status would typically depend on the court’s determination of immediate risk, the credibility of supporting declarations, and other factors outlined under state or federal restraining-order procedures applicable to the case. Further developments would be expected as the case proceeds and as the parties respond to the filing.

Legal and factual disputes in restraining-order proceedings can evolve quickly. If the court grants the requested relief, it would establish enforceable obligations for Miller pending later proceedings. If it denies the request, Grisham’s underlying civil litigation would continue, with any additional motions to be handled through the court’s normal process.