Plaintiffs are making one last effort to ban transgender women from college sororities by appealing a case that began at the University of Wyoming.
In 2023, some members of the Kappa Kappa Gamma UW chapter launched a federal lawsuit to remove a transgender student inducted just months before. The lawsuit argued the sorority broke its contract with members, who believed the induction of a transgender member at UW went against the promise of a women-only space.
The lawsuit became a national flashpoint in debates about the inclusion of transgender women in female spaces. In June, the U.S. Department of Education announced it was opening an investigation into UW over its decision to allow a trans-inclusive sorority on its campus.
The lawsuit has been less successful in the courtroom. It was defeated in the U.S. District Court of Wyoming, and rejected by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. The suit was refiled in the district court this summer, but Judge Alan Johnson ultimately ruled that private organizations like sororities are allowed to induct whomever they want. He dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it may not be brought again.
However, the plaintiffs still had the right to appeal and have done so, filing their petition in the 10th Circuit for a second time.
If they lose that appeal, the lawsuit will be officially dead and cannot be brought again.
Only two of the original six named plaintiffs remain attached to the suit, Hannah Holtmeier and Allison Coghan, but they have been joined by another former UW student, Haley Rutsch.
Since the lawsuit was launched in 2023, the plaintiffs and their legal counsel have appeared repeatedly on national conservative media. A few, including Holtmeier, Coghan and former plaintiff Maddie Ramar, have become ambassadors for the Independent Women's Forum, a national organization opposed to transgender inclusion in female spaces.
In August, the transgender student at the heart of the case, Artemis Langford, told Wyoming Public Radio she received death threats after Fox News' Megyn Kelly suggested Langford had joined the sorority to creep on women.
The first iteration of the lawsuit named Langford herself as a defendant and included dozens of pages describing alleged behavior that made the plaintiffs uncomfortable.
In his first ruling against the lawsuit, Judge Johnson noted these allegations were "unsubstantiated" and irrelevant because they did not connect to the main questions raised by the lawsuit.
In a footnote, Johnson warned the plaintiffs that the allegations were "unbefitting in federal court" and advised them not to "copy and paste" these elements into their amended complaint.
The refiled lawsuit dropped Langford as a defendant and cut the allegations about her.
Langford maintains those allegations, which the plaintiffs and at least one of their lawyers discussed on national TV, have ruined her reputation. She is now suing the lawyers who represented the sorority sisters, seeking damages.
Langford's lawsuit is proceeding in Laramie County District Court.
