How Rep. Max Miller and His Lawyer Try to Silence Foes

A few months ago, as Mother Jones prepared to publish an investigation about allegations of physical abuse against three women by Ohio Republican Rep. Max Miller, his crisis communications adviser warned me that Miller has “many defamation lawyers.”

When I asked the spokesperson, Chris Vlasto, if that was a threat, he demurred. But the possible implication seemed clear: publish a story that reflected poorly on Miller and potentially face legal consequences. 

Perhaps taking a page from his former boss Donald Trump, for whom he worked as a campaign and White House aide before running for Congress in 2022, Miller and his many lawyers have deployed aggressive legal tactics against a range of foes in recent years, from the ex-husband of his current love interest to his current congressional opponent Brian Poindexter. 

Miller’s barrage of lawsuits and cease and desists has included defamation cases against two former romantic partners who accused him of assault, including former White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham, who wrote that an ex, widely understood to be Miller, “got physical” with her; and ex-wife Emily Moreno, who claimed Miller had “held a gun” to her head, tossed boiling water at her, and shoved her against a wall.

In September, Miller sent a cease and desist letter to local television stations for running an advertisement created by Poindexter’s campaign, contending that its characterization of the allegations of violence by Miller were defamatory. Amanda Litman, a Democratic political organizer, also received a cease and desist in August after characterizing Miller on social media as a man who had “broken his toddler’s collarbone.” (As Mother Jones reported in July, Miller was investigated for his daughter’s broken collarbone but the case was ultimately “unsubstantiated,” according to an investigative report supplement. Nobody was prosecuted for the child’s injury. Litman deleted her original post.) 

Even in an age of heightened political lawfare, the approach of Miller and his lawyers stands out in that many of their written communications can reasonably be perceived as legal or reputational threats. In one instance, Miller told Moreno’s then-lawyer, Vince Stafford, that he intended to speak publicly about an alleged connection Stafford had to a 2013 murder. (Stafford and his brother Joseph ran a law firm that employed a man, Gregory Moore, who has been accused of murdering a client, Aliza Sherman, because he was ill-prepared to represent her in court. Moore is about to stand criminal trial. In a separate civil suit filed in 2026, the daughter of the slain woman alleged that Moore “had help from his employer, Stafford Law.” Specifically, the suit alleges that “upon learning of Mr. Moore’s conduct, and the prosecutor’s investigation,” Stafford Law helped Moore obtain new cellular devices that were used to “perform overt acts in furtherance of the kidnapping of Aliza Sherman in a manner calculated to avoid detection.”)

“You and your brother’s alleged involvement in this is awful… Thanks again for this variable,” Miller wrote in one of several emails requesting that Moreno’s lawyers expedite their work on the divorce. The email was later included in a court exhibit in which Moreno’s legal team requested a restraining order against Miller.

“I will be commenting on this if I do not hear anything by end of day,” Miller wrote in another email to Stafford, which also appeared in court filings. “I didn’t create this issue, you, the opposing counsel, allegedly did. Don’t salivate. I’m smart enough not to be sued for defamation. I’ll wait until this evening. Enjoy the beautiful day outside!!” (Vince Stafford declined to comment. Responding to questions about the civil suit and Miller’s emails, Joseph Stafford said “all” of the statements pertaining to him in the civil suit are “false, and distortions of the truth.”)

Miller has also made apparent threats to his former father-in-law, US Senator Bernie Moreno. In August, Miller told Mother Jones he had some form of dirt on the Ohio Senator. He conveyed something similar in a direct text to Sen. Moreno, which was also included as an exhibit in a court filings in Miller and Moreno’s custody case.

“Take this however you want, everyone is going to get to know you better than your wife does,” Miller wrote. “Enjoy the ride brother, I wouldn’t have to do this if you could keep your lying daughter under control.”

On a separate matter, Miller’s lawyer of several years, Larry Zukerman, also deployed unusually aggressive tactics in a previously unreported cease and desist letter obtained by Mother Jones. There is no indication that Miller directed this letter to be sent. It says it was written on behalf of Jaclyn Alatrash, whom the letter referred to as the “significant other” of “Congressman Max Miller.” The recipient was Matthew Kampert, a physician who was previously married to Alatrash.

As is standard practice in cease and desist letters, it commanded Kampert to stop speaking negatively about his ex-wife to local media and third parties. In a footnote citing the dissolution of their marriage, Zukerman threatened that Alatrash could reopen their separation proceedings “to seek an award of spousal support, as well as her rightful interest in any other personal and/or real property.”

“If your conduct as addressed herein does not immediately cease, Ms. Alatrash may pursue an action to vacate your dissolution and to recover any and all assets and property from you to which she has a legal right,” it says. Kampert says this felt like an effort to “extort more money” from him. (Earlier this month, Alatrash was indicted by a grand jury for grand theft, telecommunications fraud, and misuse of a credit card in connection to allegations from Kampert that she spent over $9,000 with his credit cards after they were legally separated. She’s scheduled to be arraigned on October 23.)

The cease and desist then accused him of working with Emily Moreno to damage the reputations of Alatrash and Miller. 

“It seems you believe that you share a common purpose with Ms. Moreno Miller, though I assure you that you are being deceived,” Zukerman writes, accusing Kampert of “menacing by stalking” and “telecommunications harassment.”

For his part, Kampert says he has never spoken to Moreno. But Zukerman, who has represented Miller since at least 2021, claimed Moreno is nonetheless using him as “a disposable tool to advance her own agenda, leaving you to bear the consequences, including potential risks to your medical license.” 

Zukerman went on to state that he had unrelated information on Kampert that could jeopardize his career. “I am also aware of your willingness to engage in cruel and criminal behavior, including but not limited to, criminal diversion of narcotics from your place of employment,” Zukerman wrote under a screenshotted text of Kampert admitting he gave his dog medication.

Stealing narcotics is indeed illegal, but Kampert adamantly denies the claim. He says he gave his 10-year-old dog a steroid injection to help the pet’s arthritis pain once in 2021. Though Kampert is not a veterinarian, corticosteroids are not controlled substances. 

Citing Ohio’s “cruelty to animals” criminal statute, Zukerman wrote that the steriod injection“may have ultimately resulted in your dog’s death.” Yet Roo didn’t die until two years after he administered the medication, which Kampert says seemed to improve the dog’s mobility.

Two experts pointed to potential issues with the way the letter presents this evidence. For one, the screenshot about the medication appears to have “nothing to do with any legitimate claim that the writer has,” says New York University Law School professor Stephen Gillers, whose expertise is legal and judicial ethics. After reviewing the cease and desist, Gillers added: “Without coming to any conclusion here, and depending upon which state’s law applies, that could be seen as extortionate.”

And beyond accusing Kampert of a crime he denies, there’s another potential issue with Zukerman’s letter. Zukerman demands the letter be kept “confidential,” and writes that “unauthorized disclosure may result in additional legal consequences.”

Upon review of the letter, Michael Frisch, ethics counsel at Georgetown Law Center, says that statement could be viewed as providing legal advice to an opposing side, which is forbidden by professional conduct rules. 

Kampert rebukes the suggestion that Zukerman gave him “advice.” To him, it felt like an effort to “intimidate and threaten my livelihood.” 

I reached out to Miller, his spokespeople, and his lawyers to ask about the intent of their apparent legal strategy. Were the contents of the cease and desist sent to Kampert, the text sent to Sen. Moreno, the emails sent to Vince Stafford, and the comments made to me before publishing our July 18 investigation meant to be threatening?

They declined to respond.