Flipping the script: How America’s first ladies are refusing to play by the rules

Melania Trump might have freed other first ladies, future and past, to be themselves.

Photo by Tim Gouw on Unsplash

By Kate Andersen Brower

Our country is clearly going through an identity crisis. Since Jan. 20, every day has brought astonishing news. Whether it’s President Donald Trump dismantling key agencies or threatening to displace millions of Palestinians and turn Gaza into a seaside oasis, smaller stories are understandably swallowed up in the maelstrom. But, just as Trump is throwing away democratic principles, his wife, first lady Melania Trump, is challenging the status quo in her own way. This Presidents’ Day, I’m thinking about how both Trumps are changing the presidency.

When Melania left the White House in 2021, she was the least popular first lady ever. Most first ladies poll well above their husbands, no matter how badly their husband’s job approval might be by the end of their presidency. Just look at Laura Bush, who had an incredible 67% approval rating in a January 2009 CNN/ORC poll. Compare that with President George W. Bush’s dismal 35% in the same poll. In fact, Laura Bush and Michelle Obama—who had a whopping 69% favorable rating—were continuing the trend. That’s because first ladies have historically been able to distance themselves from their husband’s most controversial policies. Jill Biden left with a 33 percent approval rating. President Joe Biden’s approval rating was about 36 percent.

Nothing in the Constitution lays out the first lady’s job description. Though it takes a nation to elect a president, “we were elected by one man,” Laura Bush quipped. These women become international celebrities, whether they like it or not. They are usually their husbands most trusted advisers, but they sometimes disagree with them about policy—see the shocking revelation that Melania is prochoice, even as her husband set in motion the demise of Roe v. Wade. Her honesty surprised me. Laura and Barbara Bush would not have let anyone know what they thought of their husbands’ policies while they were still actively engaged in politics.

In a January interview on Fox News, Melania said, "Maybe some people they see me as just the wife of the president, but I am standing on my own two feet. Independent. I have my own thoughts. I have my own yes and no. I don't always agree with what my husband is saying or doing, and that's okay." Maybe this is the new way of doing business, or maybe it’s just one more nail in the coffin of American democracy. Melania might disagree with her husband on many of the not oppressing issues of the day, but by admitting that so publicly she’s also showing what little influence she has on her husband. It’s almost as though she’s throwing her hands up and reinforcing feminine powerlessness.

I’m eager to see how a man will redefine the archaic role of an unpaid spouse. And when that day comes—fingers crossed that it arrives sooner than later—I’m betting that the unspoken rules that first ladies have been expected to follow will all but disappear.

Before “first lady,” the president’s spouse was occasionally referred to as “Mrs. President.” Realizing the price they would pay for that moniker, no modern first lady would want to be referred to as “Mrs. President.”

Americans are uncomfortable with a first lady in any policy position. See Hillary Clinton. She left with a net popularity rating below 52 percent, shown in a January 2001 CNN/Time/Yankelovich Partners poll, a historic low at the time.

First ladies, no matter how brilliant and well-educated, are confined to their offices in the East Wing and their private space on the second and third floors of the White House residence. In a letter to first lady Betty Ford, a Texas woman wrote, in all seriousness: “You are constitutionally required to be perfect.” So much is expected of these women while so little is defined about their day-to-day lives. Lady Bird Johnson said a first lady needs to be a “showman and a salesman, a clothes horse and a publicity sounding board, with a good heart, and a real interest in the folks” from all over the country, rich and poor. What an impossible assignment.

One of my favorite first ladies, Rosalynn Carter, understood decades ago the covert power a first lady wields – if she’s willing to take the risk. “I have learned,” she told me, “that you can do anything you want to.” So maybe that explains why Melania Trump has chosen to do so little. She simply doesn’t feel like it. Carter was sitting in on Cabinet meetings, but Melania prefers the luxuries of her former life. The question we should be asking ourselves is whether there’s anything wrong with that. Probably not, but Melania’s decision to monetize her job as first lady by issuing her own meme coin is problematic. It goes far beyond anything we’ve seen and debases the position.

But first ladies are not cookie cutters. They are independent, unique women. Martha Washington called herself a “state prisoner.” Jacqueline Kennedy proclaimed: “The one thing I do not want to be called is ‘First Lady.’ It sounds like a saddle horse.” And Michelle Obama said that living in the White House is like living in a “really nice prison.” Nancy Reagan, however, proudly put “First Lady” as her occupation on her income tax forms—she had worked hard for it.

I’ve enjoyed seeing women from both sides of the aisle do their own thing. Melania refused to move into the White House while their son, Barron, finished the school year in New York. Now she says she’ll split time between Washington, D.C., New York City and Palm Beach. Michelle Obama, like the women who came before her, used to play by the rules—she would have preferred to have her two young daughters finish school in Chicago, but at the time it didn’t seem like she had a choice. After Trump won, Michelle followed protocol and invited Melania to the White House for tea. Four years later, Melania did not extend that invitation to Jill Biden. And, after Donald Trump’s 2024 victory, Melania declined a invitation from Biden.

In a strange twist, Melania may have opened the door for other first ladies to prioritize their own well-being. Michelle Obama was in Hawaii during President Jimmy Carter’s state funeral. If she had attended, she would have had to sit next to Donald Trump, and she could no longer act like everything was normal. In her blockbuster memoir, “Becoming,” she wrote, “Donald Trump, with his loud and reckless innuendos, was putting my family’s safety at risk. And for this I’d never forgive him.” She also decided not to attend Trump’s inauguration.

When former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Mike Pence, whose wife, Karen, also didn’t attend the inauguration, made their way to the stage for Trump’s swearing-in ceremony, plenty of people felt sorry for them. Where were the women who were meant to stand by their sides through thick and thin? But I think Michelle Obama and Karen Pence were showing how much they cared about their families and their country. Their husbands’ safety was put at risk because of Donald Trump.

These no-shows get down to a fundamental question: How much does an unelected spouse owe the country after she’s left? Hasn’t Michelle Obama done enough? When Melania Trump doesn’t want to do something, she simply doesn’t do it. Now, Michelle Obama is following suit.

Couldn’t she accomplish more if she knew how things have been done for decades? Apparently, she doesn’t think so.

Kate Andersen Brower is the author of the New York Times bestseller “First Women: The Grace & Power of America’s Modern First Ladies.” She also wrote the New York Times bestseller “The Residence: Inside the Private World of the White House.” “The Residence” is the inspiration behind a Shondaland show of the same name premiering on Netflix on March 20^th.

---