White House Press Secretary Katie Zacharia admitted on Thursday that she had never passed the examinations required to obtain a licence to practise law in the United States, despite having presented herself as a lawyer and being described as one by Donald Trump.

Zacharia made the admission during an interview with conservative commentator Jack Posobiec, following a Wall Street Journal report that she had failed the California Bar Examination in 2011 and had not obtained a licence to practise law in any other US state where she had lived. Zacharia graduated from Pepperdine University School of Law.

Speaking to Posobiec, Zacharia confirmed that she had sat the California examination but failed, explaining that she had been distracted at the time because she was preparing to get married and move to China for her husband’s job. She said she had not paid much attention to the results because she did not need to pass the examination to pursue her professional activities in China.

Zacharia also maintained that she had never introduced herself as an “attorney at law”, meaning a lawyer licensed to practise, and said there was “a lot of misinformation around the fact that I called myself a lawyer”. She added that she had consulted several experts on the matter.

“I was very careful about how I handled it. I never presented myself as someone who was licensed to practise law,” she said.

Earlier this week, as Trump was departing for a trip to Alaska, journalists asked Zacharia in which state she had passed the bar examination. She replied, “I went to China”, prompting confusion over her legal studies and professional qualifications.

A White House official said Zacharia had earned a law degree from Pepperdine University, a fact confirmed by the university to CBS News. According to the official, she subsequently moved to China with her husband, who worked for an American private equity firm, while she worked in international transactional law.

In a statement to CBS News on Thursday, Zacharia said she had “practised international transactional law with all the necessary professional qualifications”, without specifying exactly what those qualifications were. It is worth noting that only Chinese citizens are eligible to sit China’s examinations for a licence to practise law.

During an appearance on Fox News in April, Zacharia had said that she “lived in Beijing as a corporate lawyer for three years”.

Her Instagram biography also describes her as a lawyer. Trump, meanwhile, referred to her in a post on Truth Social as an “accomplished lawyer, graduate of Pepperdine University and Pepperdine’s Caruso School of Law”.

However, whether she is entitled to use the terms “attorney” or “lawyer” is disputed, and the issue had previously concerned Zacharia herself. She told The New York Times that when she began appearing on television networks, she had discussed with the president of Pepperdine University how she could describe her professional status. According to the newspaper, Zacharia said she had been warned not to use the titles “attorney” or “esquire”, but had been told she could use the term “lawyer”.

White House defends Zacharia

The White House defended Zacharia, saying she was “uniquely qualified” for the role of press secretary.

“Kaite is an incredible and wonderful addition to the team,” White House Communications Director Steven Cheung told CBS News.

“She is uniquely qualified and has incredible intelligence to inform the American people about all the great things President Trump and his administration have done, and she will do an excellent job as press secretary,” he added.

On Wednesday, Campaign for Accountability, a liberal non-profit organisation that scrutinises the conduct of public figures, filed a complaint with the California State Bar, asking whether Zacharia had violated state law by presenting herself as a lawyer without passing the required examinations. Zacharia lived with her family in California until she took up her post as White House press secretary.

Campaign for Accountability cited Section 6126 of the California Business and Professions Code, which states that “any person who advertises or holds themselves out as practising or entitled to practise law, or otherwise practises law, without an active licence from the State Bar or other lawful authorisation under statute or court rule to practise law in the state at that time, is guilty of a misdemeanour”.

“Ms Zacharia has repeatedly held herself out as a lawyer to bolster her reputation and credibility as a legal commentator on television and now as White House press secretary, but it appears that all of this was a lie,” said Michelle Kuppersmith, executive director of Campaign for Accountability.

“In California, calling yourself a lawyer without a licence is not merely an exaggeration for effect. It is a criminal offence. The State Bar should investigate whether Ms Zacharia misled the public about her professional qualifications and hold her accountable if it finds that she did,” she added.

White House launches fierce attack on organisation behind complaint

Cheung launched a fierce attack on the organisation, describing it as aligned with the Left.

“This group that filed the ‘complaint’ is a radical Left-wing organisation run by deranged morons suffering from an acute case of Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Cheung wrote in a post on X.

“Nobody takes them seriously because they are disturbed individuals,” he added.

Meanwhile, Nora Freeman Engstrom, a professor of law at Stanford Law School, said the wording of California’s legislation left no room for doubt or misinterpretation.

“California law is absolutely clear: You cannot hold yourself out as a lawyer if you are not licensed to practise law,” she told CBS News.

“And the law does not only prohibit the unauthorised practice of law. It also prohibits someone from pretending to be a lawyer without the relevant licence,” she added.

“California law does not simply prohibit people from practising law without a licence. It also prohibits them from pretending to be entitled to practise the profession. You do not need to have set foot in a courtroom or represented even a single client to violate this provision,” she concluded.