A judge dismisses a lawsuit brought by sorority sisters who sought to prevent a transgender woman from joining
CHEYENNE, Wyoming (AP) – A judge has been fired Disputed lawsuit Admitting a transgender woman to a sorority at the University of Wyoming, he ruled that he could not bypass how a private volunteer organization defines a woman and orders her non-affiliation.
In the lawsuit, six members of the Kappa Kappa Gamma chapter challenged Artemis Langford’s admission by questioning whether or not the sorority rules followed. Transgender women are allowed. In his ruling, Wyoming District Court Judge Alan Johnson found that the sorority’s bylaws did not define who a woman was.
The case at Wyoming’s only four-year public university has drawn widespread attention as transgender people fight for more acceptance in schools, athletics, the workplace and elsewhere, while others fight back.
Johnson ruled Friday that a federal court cannot interfere with a sorority chapter’s freedom of association by ruling against its vote to recruit a transgender woman last year.
With no definition of a woman in the Sorority’s bylaws, Johnson ruled that he could not enforce the Six Sisters’ definition of a woman rather than the more broad definition of a sorority given in court.
“As her investigation begins and ends there, the court will not name ‘woman’ today,” Johnson wrote.
Langford’s attorney, Rachel Perkins, welcomed the ruling.
“The allegations against Ms Langford should not have reached a legal file. They are nothing more than cruel rumors that mirror exactly the kind of rumors used to demonize and dehumanize members of the LGBTQIA+ community for generations. “It’s baseless,” Perkins said in an email.
the The sorority sisters who sued He said that Langford’s presence in their sorority house made them uncomfortable. But while the lawsuit portrayed Langford as a “sexual predator,” the allegations about her behavior turned out to be “no more than a drunken rumor,” Perkness said.
The sisters’ attorney, Cassie Craven, said via email that they disagreed with the ruling and that the core issue – the definition of a woman – had yet to be determined.
“Women have a biological reality that deserves protection and recognition, and we will continue to fight for that right just as women suffragettes have been told for decades that their bodies, their opinions, and their safety don’t matter,” Craven wrote.
