University of Wyoming should take stand against Trump and trans discrimination

The fact that the Department of Education is investigating the University of Wyoming and threatening its federal funding is news, but not the surprising kind. 

It’s the second time this year UW has responded to a federal probe. The first was only three months ago, when it promptly caved in to a Trump administration demand to drop a program aimed at helping minority students succeed in doctoral programs.

The program was supposedly a civil rights violation because it supported graduate students of color, who are underrepresented in academia.

Now UW is facing another civil rights issue, this time because the Trump administration is pissed off that the university didn’t keep the Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority from admitting a transgender woman as a member. Hanging in the balance is federal funding.

UW’s defense is that it doesn’t control the membership of a private organization, so the feds should leave the university alone and not touch its money. That’s true, but it is unlikely to deter the Trump administration.

If you follow the pattern of the more than 60 investigations at universities across the country, the common thread is that Trump’s administration doesn’t need a valid reason for any of them. All the president’s team needs is an ideological controversy to exploit to show it can control how higher education functions. It uses budget cut threats if universities allow protesters to defend Palestine, don’t end DEI policies, refuse to adopt merit-based admissions and hiring, and other hot-button issues.

The Laramie campus is home to a doozy that’s just the right kind of issue the president loves to use to rile up his far-right followers. The case has played out in the media and the courts for two and a half years, after the Kappa Kappa Gamma voted to admit transgender student Artemis Langford into the sorority.

The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has already challenged California, Maine and Pennsylvania policies for transgender athletes. The Langford case gives the federal agency an opportunity to claim UW “allowed a man to join a campus sorority.” If people object to transgender individuals competing in women’s sports, how will they feel about them living with women at a sorority house?

Except Langford, who recently graduated, never lived at the Kappa Kappa Gamma residence on campus. 

Langford’s acceptance into KKG touched off a firestorm in December 2022, when Todd Schmidt, a Laramie Faith Community Church elder, displayed a banner at his table in UW’s union that stated, “God created man and woman and Artemis Langford is a man.” Schmidt was made to remove her name, but allowed to stay.

Students protested that UW should protect Langford from harassment. The administration kicked Schmidt out of the union and suspended his tabling privileges for a year.

Schmidt sued UW for violating his First Amendment rights and won. A federal judge ruled Schmidt’s actions weren’t harassment or discrimination and his tabling privileges must be reinstated. The university agreed to pay Schmidt $35,000 for attorney fees and expenses.

It was a small amount of money. But did the legal defeat play a role in how the university handled other complaints?

The transgender controversy reminds me of UW’s response a year ago to separate complaints from legislators about its Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, which also demonstrated why LGBTQ+ and other minority students have little to no confidence that officials have their back. 

The office and DEI programs on campus welcomed diverse and unconventional students, including Native Americans, veterans and first-generation college students.

At stake was state funding if UW didn’t reject all DEI policies. From a fiduciary standpoint, I get it: A public university must protect its funding.

When the Legislature stripped $1.7 million from the university’s budget in March 2024, UW President Ed Seidel said there were no plans to close the DEI office and its programming could continue with private dollars. 

But UW bowed to the Legislature’s pressure, despite overwhelming support for its mission among members of the campus community who spoke at public meetings where the cuts were discussed. Two months later, the UW Board of Trustees unanimously voted to close the DEI office. It could not be saved with private funds.

I fear that not doing the right thing is becoming the university administration’s de facto stance. It shouldn’t be.

In March 2023, six members sued the sorority for allegedly breaking its bylaws, breaching housing contracts and misleading sisters when it admitted Langford. 

Wyoming’s U.S. District Court Judge Alan B. Johnson dismissed the case in August 2023 because the government cannot interfere with how a private, voluntary organization determines its members. While its bylaws state that a new member “shall be a woman,” the judge noted the sorority can interpret the word itself.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the women’s appeal but said they could re-file a complaint in Johnson’s court.

What’s fascinating about this case is that it can be argued it’s a violation of Title IX — a federal law prohibiting discrimination based on sex in educational programs and activities — two ways, depending on who’s president. The Biden administration favored protecting transgender rights; Trump wants those protections gutted.

UW noted it wasn’t named in the sorority sisters’ federal lawsuit because it has no control over who becomes a member.

In fact, Title IX provides an exemption for membership practices of sororities and fraternities. But the Department of Education claimed KKG lost its exemption when it admitted a transgender woman.

In its statement, UW said the initiation of an investigation is not itself evidence of a violation of federal civil rights laws and regulations.

Then it added, “The university believes it has been and is in compliance with Title IX but intends to fully cooperate with the investigation and will work with the Office for Civil Rights to come into compliance if needed.”

Here’s my interpretation of that statement: “We don’t think we broke any laws here, but if you fellows think we did, we’ll work with you. Just don’t stop giving us money.”

I’d like to know if UW officials think Title IX should protect transgender women from discrimination based on sex, or if it protects cisgender students from transgender women.

UW is unlikely to change its hands-off approach unless the Department of Education determines UW violated Title IX and cuts its funding. I’d like to believe it would challenge such a finding and actively defend a private organization’s right to determine its own membership. 

UW was right to protect Langford when she was targeted for harassment at the union. Educational institutions must protect transgender persons from discrimination, and Wyoming needs to hear that commitment from its university.