A shocking complaint filed with the House Ethics Committee alleges that Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) engaged in sexual relationships with multiple staff members, including her former district director, amid claims of a hush payment exceeding $200,000.

The sworn testimony filed by David B. Wheeler, president of the political action committee American Muckrakers, suggests that Boebert’s purported relationships included encounters in the office, in vehicles, and in campaign-funded hotel rooms. The complaints arise as Boebert’s former district director, Clarice Navarro Ratzlaff, reportedly threatened to file an ethics complaint after leaving her position.

According to the complaint, shortly after Navarro Ratzlaff indicated her intention to go public, she allegedly received a payment of approximately $200,000 in March 2025. Details regarding the source of this money remain unclear, as the part of the filing discussing how Wheeler verified the payment is redacted.

Navarro Ratzlaff is a well-known figure in Colorado politics, having previously served as a lawmaker and held a role at the U.S. Department of Agriculture during the Trump administration. She managed Boebert’s district operations for four years.

This complaint, filed on September 17, marks a significant escalation in accusations against Boebert, who has been a controversial figure since her election. The filing is particularly noteworthy as it alleges violations of House ethics rules, which prohibit sexual relationships between members of Congress and their staff.

House Rule XXIII explicitly bars members from engaging in sexual relationships with any employees under their supervision, allowing an exception only for spouses. This measure was enacted in response to increasing scandals regarding harassment in Congress.

The alleged relationship between Boebert and Navarro Ratzlaff reportedly took place from 2021 until January 2025, and it is claimed to have involved numerous clandestine meetings, implying a pattern of misconduct during Navarro Ratzlaff’s employment.

The complaint also points to two other aides, suggesting that similar arrangements may have occurred. Evidence cited for these allegations includes unnamed sources, with some information drawn from social media photographs that display personal interactions, like birthday tributes from staffers to Boebert.

Financial records referenced in the complaint show Navarro Ratzlaff earning around $450,000 over her four years of service, which allegedly included questionable bonuses totaling approximately $31,000, suggesting the payouts were not strictly linked to her work performance.

In response to the disclosures, Boebert has been vocal about the need for transparency regarding financial settlements that silence staffers within Congress. Notably, she has been an advocate for disclosing any such payments made by her fellow lawmakers.

Previously, Boebert expressed skepticism towards congressional settlements that have cost taxpayers millions since the late 1990s, questioning the nature of agreements that remain shrouded in secrecy.

Her office, along with her campaign, did not respond to requests for comment following the filing of the complaint, and the Ethics Committee has not publicly confirmed its existence.

Boebert’s ex-husband, Jayson Boebert, labeled the allegations “propaganda” in a statement provided to Wheeler, dismissing them as fabrications without credible sources.

The controversy surrounding Boebert raises significant questions regarding conduct and ethics in Congress, especially given the backdrop of heightened scrutiny over lawmakers’ behavior and transparency.

As the Ethics Committee deliberates on the complaint, the implications of these allegations could reverberate through Boebert’s political career, as well as impacting ongoing discussions about ethics reform on Capitol Hill.

The fallout from this scandal may not just affect Boebert but could also ignite renewed calls for accountability among members of Congress, particularly relating to their professional relationships with staff.

As the situation develops, observers will likely watch closely to see how Boebert navigates this emerging controversy and whether it will lead to broader changes regarding ethics enforcement in the House.