Attorneys for four University of Wyoming sorority members filed a brief Monday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, asserting that Kappa Kappa Gamma broke its own contract by admitting a transgender woman to its chapter.
Legal claim centers on bylaws
Lead counsel Angela Lavin argues that the sorority’s founding documents, dating back to 1870, defined “women” as adult females. In 2015 the sorority’s national counsel issued a position statement expanding that definition to include anyone who identifies as a woman, regardless of biological sex. The chapter at Laramie admitted a transgender woman in 2022.
Lavin contends the national counsel failed to follow the proper amendment process required by the sorority’s bylaws – namely, providing adequate notice to members and securing a majority vote before redefining the term. She also cited Ohio nonprofit law, where the sorority’s national office is based, stating that nonprofit boards cannot adopt rules inconsistent with their governing documents.
Judges weigh authority and procedure
The case, Holtmeier et al. v. Kappa Kappa Gamma Fraternity et al., originated in Wyoming state court and was dismissed in June 2025. The plaintiffs appealed, and the appeal now sits before a three‑judge panel, including Circuit Judge Jerome Holmes.
While the judges have not issued a ruling, they questioned whether the sorority’s counsel possessed the authority to reinterpret the definition of “women” without following the procedural safeguards outlined in the bylaws. The defense, represented by Rachel M. Berkness, maintains that the counsel acted within its authority and complied with both Ohio nonprofit law and the sorority’s internal rules.
Supporters rally for traditional women’s spaces
After the hearing, a press conference outside the Byron White U.S. Courthouse featured representatives from the Independent Women’s Forum, Athletes for Action, the Daughters of the American Revolution, and alumni of Kappa Kappa Gamma. Lavin emphasized that the dispute is not about politics or personal identity but about preserving women‑only spaces that foster confidence, leadership, and philanthropy.
“When we allow men into sororities, women become uncomfortable and less likely to engage in the social and philanthropic opportunities sororities provide,” Lavin said. Several sorority members testified that sharing intimate living spaces with a biological man made them feel unsafe and disrupted the chapter’s cohesion.
Broader implications for single‑sex organizations
Legal scholars note that the case could set a precedent for how private, single‑sex organizations handle gender‑identity policies. If the appellate court finds the sorority’s process deficient, other groups may be required to seek member approval before expanding definitions of membership.
Federal Judge Nancy L. Moritz previously remarked that standing counsel has the responsibility to define “women,” a point contested by Beth Parlato of the Independent Women’s Law Center, who argued that the word has an objective, non‑subjective meaning.
Next steps
The panel is expected to issue a decision on the plaintiffs’ September 2025 appeal soon. Regardless of the outcome, the case highlights ongoing tensions between traditional women’s organizations and evolving gender‑identity policies.
Original reporting: KTBS 3 (Shreveport) — read the source article.
