Employers and HR technology vendors face a growing patchwork of state and local laws governing the use of AI in hiring and employment decisions. New York City's bias audit mandate has been in force since July 2023. Illinois has required consent and disclosure for AI video interviews since 2020. Colorado's SB 26-189, which replaces the Colorado AI Act, covers employment decisions starting January 1, 2027. And legislators in more than a dozen other states are actively advancing bills.
This guide maps the current landscape—what is in effect, what is pending, and what your compliance program needs to address today.
New York City: Local Law 144 (In Effect Since July 2023)
NYC Local Law 144—the most stringent AI hiring law currently in effect in the United States—prohibits employers from using an Automated Employment Decision Tool (AEDT) for hiring or promotion decisions affecting NYC jobs unless they have completed an independent bias audit within the past 12 months and publicly disclosed the results.
Who Must Comply
Any employer, employment agency, or recruiter—regardless of company size or location—that uses an AEDT to screen, rank, or make decisions about candidates or employees for jobs performed in New York City, including fully remote jobs associated with an NYC office.
Key Requirements
- Annual independent bias audit: Conducted by a third party (not the employer and not the tool vendor). The audit assesses disparate impact across race/ethnicity, sex, and intersectional categories (e.g., Black women, Asian men). Auditors calculate the impact ratio: each group's selection or scoring rate divided by the highest-performing group's rate. An impact ratio below 80% signals potential disparate impact under the four-fifths rule.
- Public disclosure of audit results: Results must be posted on the employer's website for at least six months and must include the audit date, data sources, applicant counts by group, and impact ratio metrics.
- Advance notice to candidates: Employers must notify candidates at least 10 business days before using an AEDT in the hiring process, including what qualifications it assesses and what data it uses.
- Opt-out alternative: Candidates must be offered an alternative assessment process if they object to AEDT evaluation, if a reasonable alternative exists.
Penalties
Enforcement is by the NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP). Penalties start at $500 per violation for a first offense, escalating to up to $1,500 per subsequent violation for ongoing violations. See our NYC Local Law 144 detail page.
Illinois: Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act (AIVIA, Effective January 1, 2020)
Illinois enacted the Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act (820 ILCS 42), effective January 1, 2020, making it one of the earliest AI hiring laws in the country.
Requirements
- Pre-interview notice: Notify applicants before the interview that AI will analyze their video and assess their fitness for the position.
- Explanation of AI criteria: Explain before the interview how the AI works and what characteristics it evaluates.
- Consent: Obtain written consent from the applicant before conducting an AI-analyzed video interview.
- Video sharing and deletion: Employers may not share videos with anyone except those evaluating the candidate. Applicants may request deletion of their video, and employers must comply within 30 days.
- Demographic reporting: If an employer relies solely on AI analysis to determine whether an applicant advances, it must collect race/ethnicity data and report it annually to the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity by December 31.
See our Illinois AIVIA page for the full statutory text.
Colorado: SB 26-189 (Applies January 1, 2027)
Colorado's AI Act (SB 24-205) became operative June 30, 2026; SB 26-189, signed May 14, 2026, repeals and replaces it effective January 1, 2027. Under an April 27, 2026 stipulated court order in X. AI LLC v. Weiser, the Attorney General may not start enforcement of SB 24-205 or 2026 replacement legislation for violations through 14 days after the court rules on xAI’s planned preliminary-injunction motion. From January 1, 2027, automated decision-making technology that materially influences consequential decisions about employment for Colorado residents triggers SB 26-189's obligations: pre-use notice, a plain-language explanation within 30 days of an adverse outcome, the opportunity to correct personal data and request meaningful human review, and three-year record retention. SB 26-189 drops SB 24-205's impact assessments, risk management programs and website disclosures. The Colorado Attorney General enforces the law; there is no private right of action. See our AI in hiring topic page for a detailed Colorado hiring AI checklist.
Maryland: HB 1202 (Facial Recognition in Hiring, Effective October 1, 2020)
Maryland's House Bill 1202 (HB 1202) restricts employers from using facial recognition technology on job applicants without written consent. It applies specifically to facial recognition, but is relevant for any employer using AI tools with facial analysis components.
State-by-State Status at a Glance
| Jurisdiction | Law | Status | Key Requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| New York City | Local Law 144 | In effect (July 2023) | Annual bias audit; public disclosure; candidate notice |
| Illinois | AIVIA (820 ILCS 42) | In effect (Jan 2020) | Consent, disclosure, video deletion rights |
| Colorado | SB 26-189 (replaces SB 24-205 on Jan. 1, 2027) | Applies January 1, 2027 | Pre-use notices, adverse-outcome explanations, human review |
| Maryland | HB 1202 | In effect (Oct 2020) | Facial recognition consent for hiring |
| Washington | SB 5838 and others (pending) | Pending as of 2026 | Automated employment decision tool requirements |
| New Jersey | Various pending bills | Pending | AI hiring audit requirements proposed |
| California | CPPA ADMT regulations | Proposed rules pending finalization | Opt-out rights for automated employment decisions |
What HR Technology Vendors Must Know
If you build or sell AI-powered hiring tools, your compliance obligations are distinct from your employer-clients'. Under NYC LL 144, the vendor cannot conduct the bias audit—only an independent third party can. Under Colorado SB 205, the AI developer must provide deployers with model cards and dataset documentation and must notify the AG within 90 days if the system causes or is likely to cause algorithmic discrimination. Contracts with employer-clients should clearly allocate compliance responsibilities, including who bears audit costs. See our AI vendor contract guidance.
What Is Coming
As of October 2026, legislators in Washington, New Jersey, Texas, and several other states are advancing bills that would impose bias audit requirements, disclosure mandates, or impact assessment obligations for AI hiring tools. The trajectory is clear: what NYC introduced in 2021 is becoming a national standard. Subscribe to our weekly AI law digest to track new hiring AI bills.
Need Help With AI Compliance?
Connect with a compliance specialist who understands your state's AI regulations.
Thanks. Your request has been received.
A compliance specialist will review your request and reach out within 1 business day.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for guidance specific to your situation.
Subscribe to the weekly AI law digest →