by Carmela Monk Crawford and Dr. Herma Percy
The 2025 presidential inauguration has sparked plenty of conversation, with one of the most talked-about moments being First Lady Michelle Obama’s decision to skip the event. The Associated Press and other outlets noted that when she announced she would not attend, Obama offered no explanation for her absence. This led to coverage and analysis of her decision as either an unprecedented lack of electoral sportsmanship, a protective measure for her emotional and physical well-being, or some framed it as a bold stand for freedom and principle.
We are going with the latter. As Michelle Obama refused to bow, kow-tow, kee-kee, or kiss the ring of power, her decision may cost her politically, but much like the Bible’s Queen Vashti, women of conscience do not simply show up when summoned—they stand firm on their principles.
Unpopular Stand
You have to know the Bible’s story of Queen Vashti to see the parallel here. King Ahasuerus or, Xerxes, was Emperor in the world’s second great superpower, that of the Medes and the Persians. The Bible’s book of Esther details how Xerxes scheduled a lavish feast for his governors, military leaders and rulers from the far reaches of his territory. This was to be a legendary and extravagant six-month ritual in obeisance. All the while, Queen Vashti held the responsibility of entertaining the women guests who attended from as far away as India and Ethiopia.
But, the Bible says, seven days into the celebration, lit and feeling good, the king called for his wife. The reason he called her was so that the noblemen could witness her beauty. In front of everybody, however, the world’s first trophy wife refused to come when called.
Here is where some miss the moment of truth in this story. Some theologians will argue that Vashti’s failure to obey her husband required her immediate dismissal. And, that’s what the royal court thought. In fact, that kind of independence is contagious, they said, and soon their women would likewise refuse to be ogled at on command.
What We Not Gonna Do
What really is the problem? It’s customary and tradition to make an appearance at such occasions, to give the victor his due. To pay respects to a man at the top of the world.
Yet, here is where power starts to unravel. Vashti refused to play along with bad behavior of even her husband. Seriously, what good would emerge from the sight of the beautiful queen, in a banquet hall of hundreds of men, drunk with wine and power? To refuse to show up, meant Vashti was missing from the optics of extravagant self-aggrandizement. Her absence did not align with this misuse of power. The Bible doesn’t say it, but the implication is probable that the room into which she refused to go set the empire’s standard in protocol and human rights. That the king would objectify his own wife, meant no one was safe from such reduction.
Human power is fearful for its position. We never hear of Vashti again, but we see the king for the insecure and petty person that he is, seeking his closest advisors’ proposals for how to handle his hurt pride, and clean the egg off his face.
“It is almost as if the narrator is inviting and expecting the reader to make a mental shift,” notes commentary from the Andrews Study Bible, “to see between the lines and discern the divine purpose working through the erratic and unpredictable actions and reactions of the king. Similarly, God is at work today, even in the corrupt and unpredictable actions of current political leaders in the world.”
Some attribute Esther’s rise from a tragic beginning as a Jewish refugee, orphan and foster child, trafficked as part of the king’s harem to her favorable and demure acceptance of her place and fate. Yet, in heaven’s calculus, Vashti’s act of conscience lit the stage for Esther’s act of conscience and the ultimate deliverance of God’s people.
All’s Well
In the last few months, pundits and influencers have condescended to explain to us that people in power, people with money, people in politics all “play the game.” They say when elections are over, at the end of the day, even the most strident opponents come together because that is how the game of politics is played.
Yet even in 2025, those kinds of alliances, the kind that run deeper than verbal jousting, the kind that kiss and make up after the buzzer— don’t exist for all candidates, at least not for the black women who are public servants and hold office. Sure, the current mantra “When Black women run, they win” is empowering, but even in victory, their service still suffers the blistering spray of detraction, tainted by bias and the bruises of the campaign trail.
Consider these statistics: according to the Pew Research Center, fewer than half the U.S. States have ever sent a black woman to represent them in Congress—just 22 states, to be exact. Black women make up only 4.1% of the House and hold 0% of Senate seats—an alarming gap, given that these bodies are responsible for shaping national laws and appropriating federal funds. Black women are glaringly absent from this crucial decision-making table. The reality is that Black women often face discouragement when considering a run for office, lacking both the training and support needed to succeed on the campaign trail , and receive little funding until they gain enough momentum to demand attention.
The lack of substantial sponsorship and allyship makes it significantly harder to build the necessary coalitions and networks that others rely on, making it unlikely that, for Black women at the end of the election season, all’s well that ends well.
The Ones to Watch
Despite the challenges, Black women have been on the frontlines, playing pivotal roles in holding Trump and his associates accountable for their actions, key ethics lapses, and upholding the principles of democracy. Consider these key examples:
- Letitia James, New York Attorney General, filed a landmark lawsuit accusing the Trump family of inflating the former president’s net worth by billions as part of a broader fraud case.
- Fani Willis, Fulton County District Attorney, took on Trump and his allies in a high-profile racketeering and election fraud investigation.
- Two Black women, Wandrea “Shaye” Moss and her mother, Ruby Freeman, election workers in Georgia, sued and won $148 million from Rudy Giuliani for defamation over false statements made during the 2020 election controversy.
- Stacey Plaskett, House Impeachment Manager and Delegate from the U.S. Virgin Islands, played a critical role in outlining the case in Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial.
- Kamala Harris, of course, ran for president in 2025 on a theme of “freedom and democracy.”
Trump has vowed retribution against those he sees as political enemies, and these women may be on his radar. But here’s the question: why weren’t all these women—who stood up for our freedoms and democratic values—pardoned by the outgoing administration? After all the promises of unity and healing, are all these women safe from the political storm that looms over them?
Sadly, these women, along with many others, are part of a broader sweep of targets that includes minority groups, women, and, especially, Black women. You may have heard about the legal defeat of the Fearless Fund, a venture capital firm founded by Black women. The federal court ruled it unconstitutional for the firm to offer exclusive services to women of color, including Black women, despite the fact that Black women receive a minuscule portion—just 0.1%—of venture capital funding. Yet, Trump Advisor Steven Miller established America First Legal, to pursue similar claims on behalf of the nation’s “disadvantaged white people.” It’s not just about Black women in business. So, the rising legal challenges targeting marginalized groups reflect the ongoing struggle for equality, a struggle at which many of these women have been at the forefront.
Back to the Inauguration
So, when we circle back to Michelle Obama’s decision not to attend the inauguration, it’s not just about political gamesmanship. It’s about principle and conviction. Kamala Harris was initially rumored to be skipping Trump’s inauguration too. While she did ultimately attend, Michelle Obama’s actions made it clear: her absence was rooted in something much deeper—her refusal to simply play along with a system that doesn’t always have the best interests of Black women at heart.
And that’s what we not gonna do—compromise on our values for the sake of political games.
