Ericka Cruz Guevarra: I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, and welcome to the Bay. Local news to keep you rooted. In 2009. Sandy Stier and Kris Perry applied for a marriage license. The two had been living together with their children in Alameda County for years. Their license, however, was denied. That’s because just a year prior, California voters passed prop eight, banning gay marriage.
Ericka Cruz Guevarra: Stier and Perry, a lesbian couple, would later become plaintiffs in a case that would go all the way up to the Supreme Court and restore marriage equality in California. It’s been ten years since then, and last month, KQED Scott Shafer and Carlos Cabrera-Lomelí invited Stier and Perry to KQED to watch their younger selves go on stand. To defend their right to marry.
Kris Perry: Policies that institutionalize unfairness. The group that’s unequal believes that they’re not equal. It’s powerful. Policy is powerful.
Ericka Cruz Guevarra: Today, you’re going to hear from Stier and Perry in their own words, as they reflect back on their long battle for marriage equality and what it’s meant to them to be part of this monumental case all these years later. Stay with us.
Kris Perry: I am Kris Perry. I’m a plaintiff in the case that challenged proposition eight and was ruled on by the United States Supreme Court.
Sandy Stier: My name was Sandy Stier, and I was a plaintiff in Perry versus Schwarzenegger, which ended up being called Hollingsworth versus Perry in the United State Supreme Court. And that is the case that restored marriage equality to California. You know, before we went to the trial, we we were certainly both very anxious about it, but also, you know, kind of saying it’s going to be fine, you’re going to do great, you’re going to be good. And so we just tried to kind of hold each other up and and give each other a lot of support. And we were clenching hands before we went up.
Why are you a plaintiff in this case?
Sandy Stier: Well, I’m a plaintiff, as in this case, because I would like to get married, and I would like to marry the person that I choose, and that is Kris Perry. So I did not come out until much later in life. So when I was right out of college mirrors or receiver, I would move to California, got married to a man, got two kids and knew that something wasn’t working for me. I couldn’t fully understand that for quite some time. And I fell in love with Kris. That’s when I understood, first of all, the concept of falling in love, which until then, I don’t think I can wrap my head around until I actually experienced it for myself.
In general terms, how did that relationship grow and what did what did it grow into?
Kris Perry: Well, I remember the first time I met Sandy thinking she was maybe the sparkliest person I’d ever met. And, um, and I wanted to be her friend. And we were friends for a few years, and and our friendship became more and more, um, it became deeper and deeper over time and, and and then after a few years, I began to feel that I might be falling in love with her.
Sandy Stier: I really felt like the thunderbolt of a change for me. I was so struck by my feelings and the intensity of them. I felt like it just sort of took over my life. I felt like I just grabbed something and held on and did not let go of no matter what.
Kris Perry: So we were pretty clear early on that we wanted it to be long term, and that we had to take the steps to make that happen.
Sandy Stier: And so I just felt like no matter what, I’m going to hold on to this because this person that I love, I’m crazy about, I will not let go of, I will not. No matter what.
You learn in some way that the mayor of the City of San Francisco had authorized the issuance of marriage licenses and the performance of marriage in San Francisco. Am I stating that correctly? Yes. Was that that was in the early part of 2004?
Kris Perry: Yes. For us, it was February of 2004.
And what did you did you act on that information?
Kris Perry: I did, I, um, I, Sandy and I both were. We’re reading about it in the newspaper, and we talked about whether or not we would want to. I would go to San Francisco to have this, the marriage and then continue with our other plans. And that’s what we decided we want to do. So we made an appointment and we went to City Hall and we brought, um, all of the boys and my mom and we were married in City Hall. A few weeks after our August ceremony, the state Supreme Court ruled that the San Francisco weddings were invalid.
Kris Perry: Policy is powerful, and I you internalize that state. You internalize those policies and beliefs into your own psyche. And for me, I really believed I wasn’t as good as heterosexual married people.
Sandy Stier: It’s amazing. She’s a really strong person. Professionally, personally and just every way. But to see what that had done to her. To see what living with discrimination had done to her. The painful to know that about. To have to bear witness to that suffering. I had never felt like I wouldn’t have access to marriage. I always thought I would.
Sandy Stier: And then when I didn’t have access to marry the person I fell in love with, I was just outraged. I didn’t feel like there was something wrong with me. I thought there was something wrong with the society, with the world, with the process. I thought, this is weird. It’s an absurd thing to to be voted on. And I couldn’t believe, quite frankly, that the majority of my fellow Californians chose to discriminate against me and every other couple or person like me.
Sandy Stier: The fact that proposition eight had gone to the voters of California seemed so wrong that people in the in the state could vote on our what we consider to be a fundamental right. Felt like the wrong way to use a political process. And so we felt like maybe it belongs in the judiciary, because do you can you have the majority of the people decide on your rights? That’s not fair. It’s just fundamentally not fair. And as a protected class, we need to have protection. And so with that, like the judicial, you know, the judicial process is where you find protection.
Did you feel that voters were being warned that they needed to protect their children from you?
Kris Perry: Yes, I did, and I felt like. I was being used. That my the fact that I, you know, I am the way I am and I can’t change the way I am, was being mocked and made fun of and disparaged in a way that I like that really didn’t have any way to respond to it. I just had to know that people felt that way.
Kris Perry: We didn’t make the decision to be plaintiffs without first checking in with the kids, and they each, in their own way, said, this is important. And of course, you should do it if we want you to succeed. And then finally, that we were in a position to do it. We were in a privileged position. We had a secure life, we had good jobs. We had children who were healthy. We had support of the family and friends. And it was we lived in a supportive community. It was it. We should do it.
What is your relationship with plaintiff Sandra Stier?
Kris Perry: Um, well, Sandy is the woman I love.
Kris Perry: What happens is you take care of other people’s homophobia. Like, I don’t want to make you feel homophobic, so I’ll be less gay around you. There’s this weird, unspoken dynamic, like you kind of closet yourself. Anyway, so this we we get we gave all that up by being plaintiffs. So we were so obviously out and we cared so much that we weren’t able to play that role anymore. We were just going to be us.
Kris Perry: I remember feeling very anxious and, um, scared, honestly not knowing how any of it would turn out, what the questions might be from the other side, how I would hold up if I would get emotional and break down a little bit, and how would I cope with that in the moment? So I was really projecting out about that, not doing a good job and and wanting to be strong. People were really the counting on us to deliver and there was a lot of pressure.
Sandy Stier: We did a lot of our trial preparation together in the same room, and that process was grueling. And also, I felt like I learned yet more about Kris and our experiences, and because we had a lot of the preparation together. I think we felt great empathy for each other, you know, for what we’ve gone through. That’s the same as what we’ve gone through. That’s quite different.
Kris Perry: We spent quite a bit of time with the lawyers practicing the answers, but more importantly, thinking deeply about our experience as a couple that had been discriminated against. And what did it really mean, and how did it really impact us and our children? So it wasn’t so much the answers as just understanding ourselves.
Being a plaintiff in a case, trying to change the Constitution, is it a burden or is it something that, um, that’s easy for you, um, because of what it means? Tell us about that.
Sandy Stier: It doesn’t feel like a burden. It just I feel like a little tiny person in this, this huge country that just. I just want my my rights.
Kris Perry: Part of this case was also intended to change public opinion. And that includes our families who live in conservative parts of the state or the country. And one thing we knew, no matter what the outcome of the trial was, was that the public was moving in our direction, that the polling was changing very rapidly, and that included our families. And in the short amount of time we could see them make the shift.
Tell us what it means to you as a plaintiff in this case if you were to be successful. How would change your life?
Sandy Stier: Well, I think it would change my life dramatically. Um, the first time somebody said to me, are you married? And I said, yes, I would think, oh, what? That feels good.
Kris Perry: Today is a great day for American children and families. Sandy. And I want to say how happy we are not only to be able to return to California and finally get married, but to be able to say to the children in California, no matter where you live, no matter who you your parents are, no matter what family you’re in. You are equal.
Sandy Stier: It felt. I don’t want to say that, great cause that’s an understatement. Yep. It really did change our lives. I more that I think I thought it would.
Kris Perry: And the depth of trust and the faith that you’re able to have because you’re not preoccupied with losing it, that you get to actually invest in it. The actual marriage, not in getting married, but being married. Wow. That’s just so different. And that that and I’m still feel grateful for it.
Sandy Stier: Words mean something. And I think that was part of the what we learned at trial. Words mean something. They have power. The word marriage means something. And if it didn’t mean something, we wouldn’t want it. And if it didn’t mean something, other people wouldn’t fight to try to keep us from having it.
Ericka Cruz Guevarra: That was Kris Perry and Sandy Stier, two plaintiffs in the landmark lawsuit that overturned prop eight. In conversation with KQED, Scott Shafer and Carlos Cabrera-Lomelí This conversation was cut down and edited by producer Maria Esquinca. It was produced and scored by Adhiti Bandlamudi, who also added all the tape.
