In a development that’s sent ripples through Capitol Hill, a Florida judge issued a restraining order on October 14, 2025, against Republican Representative Cory Mills, following grave allegations brought forth by his ex-girlfriend, Lindsey Langston. The order, which remains in effect until January 2026, bars Mills from contacting Langston in any form and prohibits him from coming within 500 feet of her residence or workplace. The judge’s decision came after Langston, who was crowned Miss United States in 2024 and serves as a Republican state committeewoman from Columbia County, alleged that Mills threatened to release sexually explicit videos of her and to harm any future partners she might have.
According to ABC News, Langston filed her petition in July, detailing that Mills’ behavior became increasingly threatening following their breakup earlier this year. The court documents reveal that Langston had “reasonable cause to believe she is in imminent danger of becoming the victim of another act of dating violence.” The judge found that Mills had caused her “substantial emotional distress” and offered “no credible rebuttal” to her testimony. In his written order, the judge stated, “The court, considering the totality of the testimony and the circumstances, does not find the Respondent’s testimony concerning the intimate videos to be truthful.”
Langston, speaking publicly for the first time since the judge’s decision, expressed a sense of relief and newfound freedom. “I do feel that justice was served, and I can't even describe the relief that I felt once I got the phone call that I had been issued the injunction for protection. I felt like I'm able to live my life again,” she told reporters during a Zoom call, as reported by ABC News. Her attorney, Bobi Frank, indicated that Langston is prepared to cooperate with any future investigations, including those that may be launched by the House Ethics Committee. Frank also suggested that Langston is not alone in her experiences, noting contact with “other individuals” involved in similar matters.
For his part, Rep. Mills has vehemently denied the allegations. In a statement provided to ABC News, Mills described the claims as “false and misrepresent the nature of my interactions,” further accusing a former Florida primary opponent of “weaponizing the legal system to launch a political attack against the man who beat him.” Mills’ congressional office and his lawyer did not respond to NBC News’ requests for further comment. He has consistently maintained his innocence, not only in this instance but also in relation to a series of other controversies that have dogged his tenure.
The restraining order against Mills is just the latest in a string of scandals. As outlined by NBC News and other outlets, Mills has previously faced a police investigation into an alleged assault—a case that was ultimately dropped after the accuser recanted her story. He’s also been dogged by accusations of “stolen valor” from military veterans, questions about a military award he received, a House Ethics Committee investigation into his financial disclosures, and even a lawsuit over alleged unpaid rent in Washington, D.C. In each instance, Mills has denied any wrongdoing, often providing detailed defenses and, in the case of the rent dispute, claiming he attempted to pay.
Yet, it’s the current restraining order that has brought the most intense scrutiny, not just on Mills but also on House Republican leadership. The day after the order was issued, House Speaker Mike Johnson faced a barrage of questions from reporters about the allegations. Johnson, appearing frustrated and eager to shift the conversation to the looming government shutdown, initially claimed ignorance of the details. “I have not heard or looked into details of that. I’ve been a little busy. We have a House Ethics Committee; if it warrants that, I am sure they’ll look into it,” he said, as reported by Mediaite and other sources.
When pressed further by journalists from NBC News and NOTUS about the seriousness of the allegations—which, beyond Langston’s claims, include the recanted assault and stolen valor accusations—Johnson doubled down on his nonchalance. “Look, you have to ask Representative Mills about that,” Johnson said. “I mean, he’s been a faithful colleague here. I know his work on the Hill. I mean, I don’t know all the details of all the individual allegations and what he’s doing in his outside life. Let’s talk about things that are really serious.”
This dismissive stance has not gone unnoticed. As NBC News pointed out, it stands in stark contrast to previous eras of Republican leadership. In the mid-2000s and early 2010s, the GOP enforced a “zero-tolerance policy” for lawmakers embroiled in scandals—sometimes urging resignations even in the absence of criminal charges. Former representatives such as Mark Souder, Chris Lee, and Vance McAllister all faced swift pressure to step down after personal scandals surfaced. The current approach, which appears to defer to the Ethics Committee or the voters, has drawn criticism from both sides of the aisle and raised questions about the party’s standards of conduct.
Langston’s allegations, detailed in her petition, paint a disturbing picture. She claimed Mills continued to contact her through Instagram accounts even after she blocked him, with messages that became “progressively more threatening over time.” The judge’s order specifically cited these threats and the emotional distress they caused. According to the Columbia County Sheriff’s Office report obtained by ABC News, Langston’s fears extended to potential harm to any future romantic partners she might have.
Meanwhile, Mills’ defenders have pointed to the lack of criminal charges and the recanting of previous accusations as evidence of a political smear campaign. The congressman himself has publicly framed the latest legal actions as part of an orchestrated attack by political opponents. However, the judge’s explicit rejection of Mills’ testimony and the imposition of a year-long restraining order suggest the court took Langston’s claims seriously, weighing the evidence and finding in her favor.
The controversy has also reignited debate over the role of the House Ethics Committee. Speaker Johnson alluded to the committee’s responsibility to investigate, should the situation warrant it. Langston’s attorney has already signaled her client’s willingness to cooperate with any such inquiry, and the possibility of further investigation remains open.
As the saga unfolds, the Mills case has become a touchstone for broader concerns about accountability, leadership, and the standards to which elected officials are held. With the House not in session and the government facing other pressing issues, the question remains: will this controversy lead to substantive action, or will it be swept aside as just another political dust-up?
For now, Lindsey Langston says she finally feels safe, and the spotlight remains fixed on Cory Mills and the Republican leadership’s response to a scandal that shows no sign of fading quietly into the background.
