Sorority alumnae take legal fight to federal court after being 'given a brother' instead of sisterhood

Maine alumnae revive lawsuit against Kappa Kappa Gamma over transgender membership dispute

In a case that has drawn national attention to the rights of private student organizations, alumnae from Kappa Kappa Gamma’s University of Wyoming chapter returned to federal court Monday to ask the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a dismissal of their lawsuit. The plaintiffs, Allie Coghan and Hannah Holtmeier, allege that the sorority’s national leadership improperly allowed a transgender woman to join the chapter in 2022 without following the organization’s standard voting procedures. The appeal could set a precedent for how private single‑sex societies manage membership changes.

The lawsuit, which was originally filed in a Wyoming district court, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Alan B. Johnson on the basis that Kappa Kappa Gamma, as a private organization, is free to define its own membership criteria. The defendants, the national leadership of the sorority, have argued that the local chapter had the authority to admit Artemis Langford, a transgender woman, and that the organization’s bylaws were not violated. Coghan and Holtmeier contend that the chapter bypassed its traditional recruitment platform, requiring members to submit non‑anonymous Google Forms linked to their email addresses instead of using the sorority’s established app. They claim the process was coercive, with officers threatening to label members “transphobic” if they voted against Langford’s admission.

“We were promised a sisterhood, and we were given a brother,” Coghan told reporters. “If Kappa wants to redefine the word woman to include men in the definition, that’s fine, but they have to go through the proper procedures to do so and allow members to vote, which they did not.” She added that the sorority’s national office had failed to respond to phone calls and emails from concerned members and parents, forcing her and her fellow sisters to file the lawsuit.

The 10th Circuit panel heard oral arguments in Denver on Monday. The appeal is a “new phase” in the legal battle, the court’s docket notes, with the three‑judge panel weighing whether to overturn the lower court’s dismissal and allow the breach of contract claim to proceed.

The alleged violations

Coghan and Holtmeier argue that the national leadership of Kappa Kappa Gamma cannot unilaterally redefine core membership terms—such as the definition of “woman”—without a formal vote from the organization’s members or an amendment to its bylaws. They claim that the chapter’s failure to follow established procedures constituted a breach of contract, undermining the rights of existing members.

“They were knocking on girls’ doors asking for proof that you had voted,” Coghan explained. “Officers told members they would be labeled ‘transphobic’ if they voted against membership.” The sisters say that the sorority house became a “political war zone.” Langford, while not a resident of the house, was granted 24/7 access to the living quarters and common areas, including an area that the sisters had to pass through to reach the showers. “The entire dynamic of the house completely shifted,” Coghan said. “You would see him sitting in the common rooms upstairs, and girls have to walk past those rooms to get to the shower.”

Holtmeier recalled an encounter with the chapter president, who told them, “If you don’t like it, your values don’t align with Kappa’s, and you can drop.” She added that the sisters had to act as lookouts for one another when showering, “because it was to the point where girls would have like a lookout basically when they’re in the shower. They would text their roommate, say, ‘Hey, I’m coming back,’ and they would have to clear the hall.”

The national reaction

The sorority has not yet released a statement in response to the appeal. Fox News Digital reached out for comment, but the organization’s representatives declined to respond.

The case has attracted attention from the broader community, including the Independent Women’s Law Center, which is supporting the alumnae. The lawsuit’s outcome could have implications for other private single‑sex organizations, such as fraternities, sororities, and some religious and professional societies.

Personal stakes for the plaintiffs

Although Coghan has since graduated, she said she remains involved out of a sense of duty to younger women. She told reporters, “I don’t understand how the feminist movement has shifted so much that it’s no longer pro‑women, it’s pro‑woman erasure.” She added, “I hope that it will really set a standard: woman means woman. A woman is an adult human female.”

The appeal also carries a personal dimension for Coghan. She said she had recently married, just two weeks before the appeal. “I was trying to decide if I wanted to sign my name on this, asking the lawyer, am I going to be married with kids before there’s any sort of resolution? And he just kind of laughed at me and said, ‘I guess it depends on how soon you get married.’ I actually just got married two weeks ago.” The emotional weight of the case is palpable, as she speaks of the “surreal” feeling of returning to court after years of trying to protect the integrity of the sorority.

Potential implications

If the 10th Circuit reverses the dismissal, the plaintiffs would be able to proceed with a breach‑of‑contract claim and argue that the national leadership violated the terms of the organization’s bylaws. A ruling in their favor could reinforce the idea that private organizations are bound by their own internal democratic processes