After their initial case was dismissed, the women are returning to court to protect future generations of young women from male intrusion.
A group of Kappa Kappa Gamma alumna have relaunched a fight in federal court to ban men from joining their sorority, after an initial case from former members with similar claims of female disenfranchisement was dismissed last year.
Oral arguments were heard Monday in Denver, Colo. in Holtmeier v. Kappa Kappa Gamma, in which the female plaintiffs argue that the Kappa Kappa Gamma headquarters violated its own governing bylaws, contracts, and founding purpose by allowing the admission of a transgender-identifying man into a definitionally female-only social club.
The case was brought by University of Wyoming Kappa alumna Hannah Holtmeier, Allie Coghan, and the mother of one of their sorority sisters. According to the plaintiffs, the organization’s founding charter and 1871 bylaws limit membership to women. The sorority’s articles of incorporation state that the organization exists for women and that leadership cannot redefine membership to include those who merely call themselves women but are provably male.
Joined by Riley Gaines and other female allies, the plaintiffs demonstrated outside the courthouse Monday, giving remarks and carrying signs.
The first case involving University of Wyoming Kappa alumna, Westenbroek v. Kappa Kappa Gamma, was brought after National Review reported that a male student named Artemis Langford had been approved to join the chapter. As in the initial case, lawyers representing the sorority have gone in circles trying to define womanhood.
The case was brought in Ohio, where the sorority is headquartered. Asked by the judge Monday if adding the word “man” to the definition of woman would be a reasonable interpretation of Ohio law, the Kappa lawyers said “no,” but then admitted that Kappa’s current interpretation of Ohio law would allow “individuals who were born as men but identify as women.”
The plaintiffs fundamentally dispute the defense’s theory that individuals who were born as men can be anything other than men for the duration of their lives, no matter their personal classification or even medical interventions. Kappa, notably, does not require interested male applicants to undergo any form of medical transition in order to join the sisterhood. Self-identification is sufficient.
Coghan, an Independent Women ambassador, said that while a positive outcome in the case would be an obvious triumph for women’s rights, she and her Kappa peers can never get back a sorority experience that wasn’t corrupted by male intrusion.
“Almost four years later, our case is finally going to be heard again,” Coghan said. “All of our girls who lived in the house at the time have graduated and moved on. But we still see the importance of protecting those spaces for future generations. I am hopeful that our case will set a strong precedent for others. I will never get the opportunity to join a sorority again, but I truly hope we can preserve the original intentions of supporting women.”
Beth Parlato, Senior Legal Counsel of Independent Women’s Law Center, accused the sorority of misleading women who had reasonably believed they were joining a female-only social club.
“These women joined Kappa Kappa Gamma with the entirely reasonable expectation that membership in a women’s sorority meant something,” Parlato said. “They should not lose their rights to privacy, dignity, and the very sisterhood they were promised simply because Kappa’s leadership decided that the word ‘woman’ no longer has an objective meaning. We hope the Court does the right thing and allow their claims to move forward.”
In her comments outside the courthouse, Angela Lavin, lead attorney arguing on behalf of the plaintiffs, noted that the decision to admit Langford was made by a small group of sorority leaders who were not transparent with the rest of the membership.
“Women’s spaces should not disappear through closed door decisions or processes that silence the very women those organizations are created to serve,” Lavin said. “Saving women’s spaces begins with respecting women’s voices.”