KYRSTEN SINEMA RETURNS WITH A BOMBSHELL ANNOUNCEMENT THAT SHAKES WASHINGTON
Sinema Admits Affair With Married Bodyguard—But the Lawsuit May Turn on Where It Happened
Former Sen. Kyrsten Sinema is trying to get a lawsuit over her relationship with a married former bodyguard dismissed.
But at this stage, the central dispute is no longer whether the relationship existed.
Sinema has acknowledged that her relationship with Matthew Ammel became romantic and intimate in May 2024 while he was married and working as part of her security operation.
The legal fight is now increasingly about something more technical.
Where did the conduct underlying that relationship take place—and is there enough of a connection to North Carolina for a court there to hear the case?
Heather Ammel, Matthew Ammel’s former wife, sued Sinema under North Carolina’s unusual “alienation of affection” law, alleging that Sinema intentionally interfered with the couple’s 14-year marriage.
Recent reporting says Heather Ammel is seeking more than $75,000 in damages.
Sinema is asking the federal court to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Her argument is not that there was no romantic relationship.
It is that the relationship occurred outside North Carolina.
That distinction has become the core of the case as an evidentiary hearing scheduled for August 19 approaches. Federal court records show that limited discovery on jurisdiction was ordered and that the hearing is set for 10 a.m. in Winston-Salem.
North Carolina is one of the few states that still recognizes alienation of affection as a civil cause of action.
Under the claim, a spouse can seek damages from a third party alleged to have wrongfully contributed to the loss of affection in a marriage.
State law also places limits on such lawsuits. Among other things, conduct occurring after spouses physically separate with the intention that the separation be permanent cannot give rise to an alienation-of-affection claim.
That makes the timing and location of Sinema’s interactions with Matthew Ammel particularly important.
In a July 31 deposition, Sinema described having sex with Ammel multiple times during 2024, according to federal court filings reported by PEOPLE.
She said their first sexual encounter occurred around Memorial Day while they were staying at an Airbnb in Napa, California.
“We were staying at an Airbnb in Napa, California. We were outside. Matt kissed me. We went inside and had sex,” Sinema testified.
The relationship continued the following month.
Sinema said she traveled to New York City for the wedding of CNN anchor Jessica Dean and that she and Ammel stayed in separate hotel rooms but became intimate in her room during the trip.
She described another encounter in mid-July at her Washington, D.C., apartment.
The pair then traveled to Aspen, Colorado, in mid-August on what Sinema described as a fundraising trip, where they again became intimate.
According to the deposition, Sinema could not recall another alleged encounter in Washington, D.C., in late September.
Matthew Ammel, however, confirmed during his own deposition that the encounter occurred, according to reporting on the court filings.
Their sexual relationship continued into October, when Sinema said they were intimate at her home in Phoenix.
None of those locations is in North Carolina.
That fact is central to Sinema’s motion.
In court filings, her attorneys argue that she did not purposefully direct conduct giving rise to Heather Ammel’s claim into North Carolina.
Sinema has said that virtually all relevant telephone calls, emails and romantic communications occurred while Matthew Ammel was outside the state.
Her lawyers contend that the one arguably romantic communication sent while Ammel was in North Carolina came after he had already been told to leave the marital home.
On that basis, they argue it could not establish the connection necessary for the court to exercise personal jurisdiction over Sinema.
Heather Ammel disputes that interpretation.
Her lawyers have argued that Sinema had sufficient contacts with North Carolina for the federal court to exercise jurisdiction and have urged the judge not to dismiss the case.
That disagreement is why the court allowed limited jurisdictional discovery before ruling on Sinema’s motion.
The distinction matters.
Sinema acknowledging an affair does not automatically resolve whether a North Carolina court has legal authority over her.
And proving that a relationship existed is not necessarily the same as proving every element of an alienation-of-affection claim.
The lawsuit still involves questions about the condition of the Ammels’ marriage, when their relationship deteriorated, what conduct allegedly caused that deterioration and whether the relevant conduct creates a sufficient connection to North Carolina.
Sinema’s deposition nevertheless removes some factual uncertainty.
She acknowledged knowing during the relationship that Matthew Ammel was married and had three children.
She was also questioned about private communications between the two.
One involved a photograph showing Sinema wrapped in a towel with cupping marks visible on her body.
Sinema said she is an endurance athlete and characterized the image in that context, while also testifying that she did not recall sending that specific photograph.
She was questioned about another affectionate message to Ammel and was asked whether she understood why his wife might be concerned about receiving that type of communication from another woman.
“Yes,” Sinema responded, according to the deposition.
Heather Ammel has provided her own account in deposition testimony.
According to the material provided in the case, she said she discovered evidence of the relationship after her husband returned home severely intoxicated while they were staying with her parents.
She also testified about discovering intimate messages on his phone.
One message attributed to Sinema described waking during the night and reaching for Ammel’s arms.
Those details may make the lawsuit personally dramatic.
But legally, the upcoming hearing is focused on a narrower question.
Sinema moved to dismiss the case in March for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Her filing acknowledged that the romantic relationship began roughly five months before the Ammels separated, while maintaining that the relationship itself took place exclusively outside North Carolina.
Heather Ammel responded that Sinema’s contacts with North Carolina were sufficient to keep the case alive.
Rather than immediately deciding between those arguments, the court ordered limited discovery specifically on jurisdiction.
That process included the depositions that have now made many details of the relationship public.
The discovery deadline was July 31.
The evidentiary hearing is scheduled for August 19.
Sinema’s political history adds another layer of attention to the dispute.
She was elected to the Senate from Arizona as a Democrat in 2018, changed her registration to Independent in 2022 and completed one term before leaving office in January 2025.
Matthew Ammel had worked on her security detail before becoming a Senate employee in June 2024, according to court filings and reporting.
That timing means at least part of their admitted intimate relationship occurred while Sinema was still a sitting senator and after Ammel became a Senate employee.
But that is separate from the legal question currently before the North Carolina federal court.
The House has adopted restrictions on sexual relationships between members and employees, while the Senate did not adopt the same prohibition, according to The Washington Post.
So the better way to understand the case is narrower than the most sensational details in the depositions.
Sinema is not asking the court to decide that the affair never happened.
She has acknowledged that it did.
She is asking the court to decide that North Carolina does not have personal jurisdiction over her because the conduct tied to the relationship occurred elsewhere.
Heather Ammel is arguing the opposite: that Sinema’s communications and connections to a North Carolina marriage are sufficient for the lawsuit to proceed.
The August 19 hearing could therefore determine whether the case moves toward a fight over responsibility and damages—or ends before those underlying allegations are ever fully tried.
May you like
For Sinema, that distinction is crucial.
And for Heather Ammel, keeping the lawsuit alive may depend not simply on proving what happened between her former husband and Sinema, but on proving that enough of what matters legally can be tied to North Carolina.
