In most of the US it is legal to use AI to help screen resumes, but a growing number of places add rules: New York City requires a bias audit and advance notice for covered tools, Illinois bars AI use that has a discriminatory effect and requires notice, and Colorado's replacement AI law is set to add notice and human review duties from 2027. Everywhere, you remain responsible if a tool screens people out unfairly, so a design where the AI ranks and a person decides, like the one in An AI Resume Screener, with a Fairness Step, is the safer starting point.
This page is a plain-language overview as of October 2026, not legal advice. These laws are new, some have changed more than once, and the details depend on where your candidates live and what your tool actually does. Check with employment counsel before you switch on any automated screening.
What does each law ask for?
New York City, Local Law 144. It covers "automated employment decision tools" used to substantially help decide who is hired or promoted, for candidates and employees in the city. Enforcement began in July 2023. Before you use a covered tool you need an independent bias audit done within the past year, a public summary of its results, and notice to candidates at least ten business days before use, including a way to ask for an alternative process or accommodation.
Illinois. Two laws matter. The Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act, in force since 2020, requires notice, an explanation and consent before AI analyzes recorded video interviews. And amendments to the Illinois Human Rights Act that took effect January 1, 2026 make it a civil rights violation to use AI in recruiting, hiring and other employment decisions in a way that discriminates against protected groups, bar using zip codes as a stand-in for protected traits, and require employers to give notice when they use AI for these purposes.
Colorado. The 2024 Colorado AI Act never took effect in its original form. In May 2026 the state repealed and replaced it with a narrower law that is set to apply to decisions made from January 1, 2027. For employers it centers on telling people when AI plays a part in a significant decision about them, offering a way to challenge an adverse decision with human review, and keeping records.
Federal law. No federal statute is written only about AI hiring, but federal anti-discrimination laws such as Title VII, the ADA and the age discrimination law still apply to every hiring decision. If a tool screens out a protected group without a job-related reason, the employer can be responsible, even when a vendor built the tool. Agency guidance on AI has shifted since 2025. The underlying laws have not.
How do I lower the risk in practice?
- Map where candidates are. A remote job posted nationally can reach NYC and Illinois applicants.
- Ask your vendor in writing whether the tool is an automated decision tool under these laws, whether it has a current bias audit, and what data it scores on.
- Keep a person in every rejection. AI can sort and summarize. A human reads the evidence and decides.
- Score only job-related must-haves, and tell the tool to ignore names, photos, addresses, graduation years and other proxies.
- Give notice in your postings or careers page about AI use, and offer an alternative process.
- Keep records of the criteria, the scores, the evidence and who made each decision.
- Review outcomes every hiring cycle for patterns by group, with counsel's help.
What does this look like in a real lesson?
In An AI Resume Screener, with a Fairness Step you hire a Staff Accountant for an accounting firm. n8n reads each applicant's PDF resume, an Information Extractor scores it against four must-haves and quotes the evidence, and a system prompt tells it to ignore name, age, gender, race, photos, address, graduation years and anything that hints at them. Results land as rows in Google Sheets, with a Decision column left empty for a person. There is no email step, so nobody is rejected automatically. You sort by score, see that one candidate's 1989 graduation and home address show up nowhere in his score or evidence, and type "Phone screen" for a low scorer because she is taking a QuickBooks course. The lesson's finish notes that NYC requires a bias audit and notice for regulated tools.
What mistakes put employers at risk?
- Assuming the vendor handles compliance. The employer is usually the one with the legal duty.
- Auto-rejecting below a score. That is the use most likely to be regulated and hardest to defend.
- Scoring on proxies like zip code, school or gaps in work history without a clear job reason.
- No notice. Candidates in some places must be told before the tool is used.
- Pasting resumes into a personal chatbot. That raises privacy issues on top of fairness. See Use AI at Work Without Leaking Client Data.
Applicant tracking systems such as Greenhouse and Workable, and interview platforms such as HireVue, include AI features. Ask each vendor which features score or rank candidates, since those are the ones these laws focus on. For the workflow side, see how to automate resume screening with AI and How do I use AI in recruiting without making hiring less fair?
Key takeaways
- AI screening is generally legal, but NYC, Illinois and Colorado add specific duties.
- You stay responsible for unfair outcomes, even with a vendor's tool.
- Keep a person on every rejection, score only job-related criteria and give notice.
- These laws change fast, so check with counsel before you rely on any summary.
Frequently asked questions
- Does NYC Local Law 144 apply if my company is not in New York City?
It can, because it focuses on candidates and employees in the city and jobs located there. If you hire for roles in NYC, ask counsel whether your tool is covered.
- Is using ChatGPT to summarize resumes covered by these laws?
It depends on how much the summary drives the decision. A tool that substantially decides who moves forward is more likely to be covered than notes a person reads alongside the resume, so ask counsel about your exact use.
- Do I need a bias audit outside New York City?
Not under Local Law 144, but reviewing your results for unfair patterns is still wise everywhere, because federal and state anti-discrimination laws apply to every hiring decision.