The House of Representatives on November 19, 2025, voted to refer a complaint by Republican Rep. Nancy Mace against fellow GOP Rep. Cory Mills to the Ethics Committee, sidestepping an immediate censure vote and initiating a formal investigation into allegations of misconduct. This move delayed direct disciplinary action but underscored the gravity of the accusations against Mills, which include disputes over his military service, claims of assault and threats, and potential campaign finance violations.
The House passed Mills’ motion to refer the censure measure with a vote of 310-103, effectively sending the matter to the Ethics Committee for further review. This decision came after Mace introduced a resolution earlier in the day seeking to censure Mills and remove him from the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees. The referral avoided a scheduled vote on censure, which would have represented a significant rebuke and could have stripped Mills of his committee assignments.
Simultaneously, the House Ethics Committee voted to establish an investigative subcommittee to probe the various allegations against Mills. This formal step signals a deepening scrutiny of his conduct, with the panel examining claims that he may have violated campaign finance laws, engaged in sexual misconduct, and committed dating violence. The committee’s action highlights bipartisan concerns over ethical standards in Congress, as the allegations have drawn attention from both sides of the aisle.
Mace’s resolution detailed several controversies, including assertions from individuals who served with Mills in the Army that dispute the events leading to his recommendation for the Bronze Star. It also outlined accusations from an ex-girlfriend, who alleged that Mills threatened to release sexually explicit videos and images of her after their breakup. A Florida judge issued a protective order against Mills in response, barring him from contacting the woman and noting that his testimony was not found truthful.
Further allegations cited in the resolution involve potential ethical breaches, such as Mills possibly entering into contracts with federal agencies while serving in Congress, which would violate House rules. The Office of Congressional Ethics also found that he may have omitted required information in financial disclosure statements and accepted excessive campaign contributions. These issues collectively paint a picture of conduct that Mace argued “brings discredit upon the House” and jeopardizes national security due to his committee roles.
Mills has vehemently denied all wrongdoing, stating that the claims are false and politically motivated. In a public statement, he emphasized that there was no backroom deal or negotiation leading to Democrats’ withdrawal of a separate censure attempt against him the previous night. He accused political opponents of weaponizing the legal system to attack him, reflecting the tense and partisan environment surrounding the case.
The censure effort saw support from seven other Republicans, including Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert, indicating divisions within the GOP. This episode is part of a broader trend where censure, once rare, has become more frequent in the House, often used to address member misconduct. The dynamics also involved Democratic actions, such as their role in the referral vote, illustrating the complex interplay of party politics in ethical matters.
The investigation by the Ethics Committee could have significant implications for Mills’ political career, including potential loss of committee seats, fines, or other disciplinary measures. It also raises questions about the enforcement of integrity and safety standards in Congress, with outcomes likely to influence future handling of similar cases. As the probe unfolds, it will be closely watched for its impact on legislative norms and public trust in governmental institutions.
