Almost two years to the day after a federal court dismissed a lawsuit against a University of Wyoming sorority for admitting a transgender woman, U.S. District Court Judge Alan B. Johnson dismissed the case again.
In his ruling Friday, Johnson’s reasoning was much the same as it was the last time he tossed the case. Kappa Kappa Gamma, the sorority that admitted student Artemis Langford in the fall of 2022, has the freedom as a private organization to decide who it wants to admit as members — including transgender women — the judge concluded.
“In short, we are required to leave Kappa alone,” Johnson wrote.
In 2023, six Kappa Kappa Gamma members sued the sorority for allegedly breaking its bylaws, breaching housing contracts and misleading sisters when it admitted Langford by a vote of its members.
The case attracted national media attention, especially from conservative outlets, and the Trump administration announced in June that it was investigating UW for alleged Title IX violations stemming from the case.
Arguing that the government cannot interfere with how a private, voluntary organization determines its members, Johnson dismissed the case in August 2023. Plaintiffs then attempted to appeal the decision, but the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver rejected the case in June 2024, kicking it back down to the lower court on the grounds Johnson’s ruling did not amount to a final order. As a result, the appeals panel did not have jurisdiction over the matter.
The dispute then went unresolved as the plaintiffs failed to take any action. In May, Johnson gave them a deadline: file an amended complaint or ask for a final ruling.
In June, a new set of plaintiffs — former UW students Hannah Holtmeier, Allison Coghan and Haley Rutsch — filed an amended complaint. They also dropped Langford as a defendant.
But even with slightly different claims and bolstered arguments, Johnson reached a similar conclusion as before.
“Having considered the issues presented (again), we find that the majority of the claims must be dismissed on the grounds that this Court still may not interfere with Kappa’s contractually valid interpretation of its own Bylaws,” Johnson ruled.
Nothing in Kappa’s governing documents requires the exclusion of transgender women, Johnson determined, and therefore the organization has not broken its own rules.
Furthermore, neither the sorority nor its governing body have concealed its inclusive definition — “in fact, it has published and distributed multiple texts clarifying the issue,” Johnson wrote.
The plaintiffs also alleged the sorority broke its voting procedure when it admitted Langford. But “they have not shown that any resulting damages surpass the amount in controversy” required to have standing in court, Johnson wrote.
While the plaintiffs did not present new evidence in the amended complaint, they did point to an executive order issued by the Trump administration earlier this year.
May Mailman, a former attorney for the plaintiffs, has been credited with crafting the order alongside Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy.
It states that “women… shall mean adult… human females” and “female… means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell.”
“We are not entirely sure what this definition means, not having a degree in biology,” Johnson wrote. “But even assuming this definition aligned with Plaintiffs’, it only applies to the Executive Branch’s interpretation of federal laws and administration policy. It is not relevant in the world of private contacts, which is where we currently find ourselves.”
Unlike the case’s dismissal in 2023, Johnson ruled “with prejudice” on Friday, meaning the same claims cannot be brought back to his court. An appeal, however, could be filed.
But Johnson pointed to another means of resolution in his ruling.
“Plaintiffs could advocate for a new amendment to the Bylaws, defining the word ‘woman’ as they wish, which would restrain Kappa from choosing between various reasonable definitions of the term,” Johnson wrote, pointing to the organization’s biennial conventions where such decisions are made.
“If as many Kappa members are upset about the admission of transgender women members as Plaintiffs claim, this internal remedy should be more than sufficient to achieve their aims.”
It should be up to the sorority to decide who they let in. It’s best to keep government out of private affairs as much as possible.
Thank you again Judge Johnson for applying the law to the facts of this case and NOT PANDERING TO TRUMP AND HIS FEARMONGERING SYCOPHANTS who seem dead set on burning the constitution at every chance. Secondly, thanks for the advice to the sorority to change its bylaws to read so that they clearly state who they choose to admit and exclude. Then they can sleep without fear at nite and others will know they might really not want to be involved.
Sorority means sisterhood, not brosterhood. The gals should say adios to Kappa Kappa Gamma since they’ve become the Bud Light of Greek life on campus.
Why are elderly men concerned with who a private sorority admits into their group?
For heavens’ sake let the women make the decision about the members of their group they want to admit on their own .. government has not place in this decision and especially not xenophobic ones. These intrusions by anti US Constitutional minds are consistently sad and must stop.. FREEDOM means for all!