Can I use AI for hiring in Illinois?

Applicable Regulations

Industry Context

Related Questions

• What are the AI video interview consent requirements in Illinois? Illinois' AI video interview consent rules come from the Illinois Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act (Public Act 101-0260, codified at 820 ILCS 42) — not HB-3773. The Act has been in effect since January 1, 2020. Before the interview (Section 5): the employer must (1) notify the applicant that AI may be used to analyze the video interview and consider the applicant's fitness for the position, (2) explain how the AI works and the general types of characteristics it uses to evaluate applicants, and (3) obtain the applicant's written consent. When sharing the video (Section 10): the employer may share the recording only with people whose expertise or technology is necessary to evaluate the applicant — not with third parties generally. On a deletion request (Section 15): the employer must delete all copies within 30 days and instruct anyone who received a copy or backup to delete theirs as well. Separate 2022 reporting amendment: a later amendment effective January 1, 2022 (PA 102-47) added demographic reporting to the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity for employers that rely solely on AI to decide whether to advance applicants to in-person interviews. Separate from HB-3773: broader employment-AI discrimination rules — a standalone employee-notice requirement and a ban on zip-code proxies — sit in HB-3773 (an Illinois Human Rights Act amendment effective January 1, 2026), which is a different law from this Video Interview Act.
• What AI rules apply to hiring in Texas? Texas does not currently have a private-sector AI hiring law that forces employers to disclose AI use, run bias audits, or let candidates opt out — there is no Texas equivalent of Illinois's AI Video Interview Act, Colorado's AI Act, or NYC Local Law 144. HB-2060 was a state-agency AI inventory and advisory law, not an employer hiring rule. TRAIGA (HB-149), effective January 1, 2026, is the main Texas AI statute for private employers, but for hiring it bites mainly when a tool is intentionally deployed to discriminate against a protected class or otherwise hits TRAIGA's prohibited-practice categories; TRAIGA does not create a general private-sector hiring disclosure mandate. TRAIGA's biometric-identification and social-scoring prohibitions apply to government entities only — biometric consent for private-sector AI tools, such as video-interview face or voice capture, is governed by Texas's CUBI statute (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §503.001), not TRAIGA. Federal Title VII still applies, so an AI tool that produces a disparate impact on protected groups is a legal risk even without a Texas disclosure law. Practically, Texas employers should document each tool, its bias controls, any biometric-consent process, and a human-review checkpoint before any adverse hiring decision.
• Does Colorado require AI impact assessments? No longer. SB 26-189 (signed 2026-05-14) repealed and reenacted Colorado's AI Act, eliminating the impact-assessment requirement entirely. Colorado now instead requires deployers of automated decision-making technology (ADMT) to: give consumers clear interaction notice, disclose adverse consequential decisions within 30 days, allow correction of incorrect personal data, and provide meaningful human review and reconsideration. The statute formally takes effect 2026-08-12, but all compliance obligations — for deployers and developers alike — begin 2027-01-01.
• How do Illinois and Colorado AI hiring laws compare? Illinois regulates AI hiring through two laws: the Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act (820 ILCS 42), which requires notice, explanation, and written consent for AI-analyzed video interviews, and HB-3773, which adds employee/applicant notice and an anti-discrimination duty for AI used in employment decisions (effective January 1, 2026). Colorado's AI Act (SB 26-189, which repealed and reenacted SB 24-205) takes a disclosure-and-notice approach: employers using automated decision-making technology (ADMT) to make or substantially influence consequential employment decisions must give interaction notice, provide a plain-language adverse-outcome explanation within 30 days, allow data correction, and ensure meaningful human review. Colorado no longer requires algorithmic impact assessments or high-risk AI system classification — that model was repealed when SB 26-189 was signed on May 14, 2026; its disclosure-and-notice obligations begin January 1, 2027.
• How should multistate employers comply with AI hiring laws? Multistate employers should baseline AI hiring workflows against the strictest active regimes, then layer state-specific rules. In practice, that means Illinois notice, consent, non-discrimination, and reporting obligations; Colorado ADMT interaction notice, adverse-outcome disclosure, data correction, and meaningful human review for consequential employment decisions beginning January 1, 2027; Minnesota profiling and data-protection-assessment obligations where covered; and Texas TRAIGA controls for prohibited discriminatory or biometric AI uses. Texas HB-2060 should not be treated as a private-employer hiring disclosure or opt-out law; it was a state-agency AI advisory and inventory statute.