A federal judge denied a transgender woman’s request to be dismissed from a highly publicized lawsuit against her and a University of Wyoming sorority, but gave a warning Wednesday to opposing counsel in the case — follow the rules of the court.
U.S. District Court Judge Alan B. Johnson noted that attorneys for the sorority sisters who sued the transgender student appeared to have “purposefully included irrelevant stigmatizing allegations” in their lawsuit. Doing so again could result in the case being tossed, he wrote.
In 2023, six members of UW’s Kappa Kappa Gamma sued the sorority for allegedly breaking its bylaws, breaching housing contracts and misleading sisters when it admitted Artemis Langford, a transgender student, by a vote of its members. The 72-page complaint also included allegations against Langford unrelated to the case and details about her physical appearance and sexual orientation, while devoting a fraction of its length to legal claims.
Johnson dismissed the case in August 2023, ruling that the government cannot interfere with how a private, voluntary organization determines its members.
The decision was “without prejudice,” which gave the plaintiffs — Jaylyn Westenbroek, Hannah Holtmeier, Allison Coghan, Grace Choate, Madeline Ramar and Megan Kosar — the option to refile an amended complaint.
“If plaintiffs wish to amend their complaint, the court advises that they devote more than 6% of their complaint to their legal claims against defendants,” Johnson wrote at the time. “It also counsels Plaintiffs to provide more factual detail, where feasible.”
Instead of refiling, the plaintiffs appealed Johnson’s decision, but the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver also dismissed the case, leaving the sorority sisters two choices — amend the complaint or ask the lower court for a final judgment.
They’ve done neither in the 11 months since and are now facing a filing deadline of June 9, as ordered by Johnson, to fish or cut bait.
Backlash and vitriol
While the case has remained in limbo, Langford “has had to bear the backlash of the Plaintiffs’ allegations,” her attorneys argued in their March request to have her dismissed from the case.
Langford’s attorneys pointed to harassment from conservative figures like Charlie Kirk, who encouraged the plaintiffs to “bully this freak.”
The attorneys also highlighted comments made by plaintiffs’ counsel on Fox News in the weeks following the lower court’s decision, casting Johnson’s decision as a political one.
But the request to have Langford removed from the case did not meet all the necessary criteria, Johnson ruled.
“This court takes very seriously the abuse suffered by Ms. Langford. No person deserves to be the object of such vitriol simply for wanting to make friends and join a club in college,” Johnson wrote in the latest filing. “If Plaintiffs decide to submit a second amended complaint that does not adhere to strictures of Rule 8, or which, relatedly, serves simply as a vehicle through which to publicize allegations about Ms. Langford that are unrelated to the legal issues, they risk dismissal of this action with prejudice.”
Details
While Johnson rejected the motion to dismiss Langford from the case, he agreed that she “suffers a high degree of prejudice as a result of the continuing litigation of this case,” he wrote.
Langford’s motion for dismissal included 67 exhibits, including dozens of pages of online comments calling her a pervert, a perpetrator of assault and harassment, and a criminal.
“Even without the information that Ms. Langford provided in her motion, we believe all parties would agree that [the complaint] objectively contained serious and stigmatizing allegations,” Johnson wrote.
The court also pointed to roughly a year of uncertainty about whether the plaintiffs would amend their complaint, which has meant mounting attorney’s fees for Langford.
But Johnson stopped short of siding with Langford when it came to the conduct of the plaintiffs’ attorneys.
About two weeks after Johnson dismissed the case, Cassie Craven, an attorney for the plaintiffs, was a guest on Fox News.
“We sought a determination in a court of law to look at the bylaws from a contractual and not political standpoint at all,” Craven said in the segment. “Unfortunately, the judge converted this into a political issue.”
Months later, May Mailman, a former attorney for the plaintiffs who now works in the Trump administration, stood on the steps of the Byron White U.S. Courthouse after addressing a skeptical three-judge panel that had tough questions.
“Women deserve the camaraderie and safety of sororities, but unfortunately, it also appears they first need courts brave enough to say so,” Mailman told reporters.
Langford’s attorneys underscored Mailman’s remarks, as well as comments made by Riley Gaines — a former college swimmer who advocates against the inclusion of transgender athletes in women’s sports.
At a University of Wyoming event, where Gaines shared the stage with the plaintiffs, she criticized Johnson’s age and accused him of being “on his last breath.”
Langford’s attorneys argued that such behavior by the plaintiffs demonstrated a lack of respect for the legal system and was in part grounds for dismissal.
Johnson, however, noted the plaintiffs have complied with deadlines and other orders, and had not been given explicit notice that such sanctions were being contemplated.
“While derogatory comments directed at this Court by outside parties are not relevant here, any public comments made by Plaintiffs’ counsel about this Court’s motives, particularly while this case is ongoing, are a disservice to everyone involved in upholding the rules of law — including Plaintiffs’ counsel themselves,” Johnson wrote. “Evidence of this rule will be taken seriously.”
When contacted Thursday by WyoFile for comment, Craven first responded with a Bible verse.
“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, And prudent in their own sight!” she wrote in an email.
In a second email, Craven took a different approach and confirmed plans to file an amended complaint.
“We recognize the importance of these sensitive issues and heed the Court’s advice to discuss them with extreme care to protect all parties involved,” Craven wrote. “These kids have all been through enough. The young women we represent look forward to reframing the issues for the Court’s consideration. We have the utmost respect for the judiciary process and the rule of law.”
John Knepper, another attorney for the plaintiffs, told WyoFile in an email that Johnson “is respected as a judge who comports himself with not only fairness but kindness to all that appear before him.”
“Sure, I have at times believed that his decision in one case or another was incorrect, but I suspect that over Judge Johnson’s more than forty years as one of Wyoming’s federal judges, he probably thinks that too,” Knepper wrote. “This does not diminish the obligation of all of us, as citizens of the United States, to respect that we are a nation governed by law, not human passions.”
Knepper also wrote that “Artemis Langford has been subjected to abuse by third-parties that is more than any person should have to endure. The plaintiffs do not, and have never supported the many vile threats against Artemis Langford.”
The plaintiffs have until June 9 to file an amended complaint, or Johnson’s dismissal will convert to a final judgment and the plaintiffs will no longer have the option to refile, effectively ending the case.
Clarification: This story has been updated to include more of Knepper’s comments. —Ed.
In the future, society will look back at the ‘gender ideology’ fad with the same clarity that current society views the pseudo-sciences of phrenology, astrology, alchemy; along with the quackery of blood letting, patent medicine, radium elixirs, and numerous ‘As Seen On TV’ gadgets.
Did Riley Gaines ever graduate college? I would bet most of these women won’t, but instead will just try and make money off this and work as little as possible for the rest of their lives. At this point: let it go and move on. You’re in your early 20’s, a whole life ahead of you…and this is it? The defining moment? How sad. And all over a ‘sorority’? 🤣
It is truly baffling to me that this is even a thing.
It is a “thing” because the new aged gop deals in hate and discontent.
I am hoping Ms Langford will write a memoir.
Excellent guidelines for commenters—clearly stated and completely reasonable. The opportunity to comment is appreciated, and deserves the same quality of discourse that you demonstrate in your reporting.
Alan Johnson shows his grit, by telling the UW Six bigots to follow the rule of law, or he’ll tell them to follow the rule of law, again.
A person’s life has been torn apart because they wanted to exist and be part of their university community, and all the judge can muster is a warning. WY justice, indeed. Beelzebub will need to expand his frozen lake, a lot of WY conservatives vying for space.