The Illinois AI Video Interview Act, Explained
The Illinois Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act is a state law, effective January 1, 2020, that regulates how employers use AI to analyze video interviews of applicants for positions based in Illinois. It requires employers to notify applicants, explain how the AI works, obtain consent, limit who can view the videos, and delete recordings within 30 days of an applicant's request. It was the first U.S. law to directly govern AI in the hiring process.
What does the Illinois AI Video Interview Act require?
The Act applies when an employer asks applicants to record video interviews and then uses an artificial intelligence analysis tool to evaluate those recordings. The tool might score facial expressions, word choice, vocal tone, or other traits to rank candidates. When that happens, the employer must satisfy four core obligations before relying on the AI.
The four requirements are:
Notice. Tell each applicant, before the interview, that AI may be used to analyze the video and consider the applicant's fitness for the position.
Explanation. Give the applicant information that explains how the AI works and what general types of characteristics it uses to evaluate applicants.
Consent. Obtain the applicant's consent to be evaluated by the AI program. An applicant who does not consent cannot be evaluated by the tool.
Limited sharing and deletion. Share the video only with people whose expertise or technology is necessary to evaluate the applicant, and, upon request, delete the video within 30 days and instruct any third parties who received copies to do the same.
The statute is short. It does not define "artificial intelligence," set out penalties, or create a private right of action in its text, which leaves several open questions covered below.
Who has to comply with the law?
Any employer that meets two conditions falls under the Act:
The position being filled is located in Illinois.
The employer asks applicants to record a video interview and uses AI analysis on those videos.
The law is triggered by the use of AI analysis, not by video interviews alone. An employer that records interviews but has a human reviewer watch them, with no automated scoring, sits outside the Act. Once an algorithmic tool evaluates the footage, the four obligations attach. There is no employee headcount threshold in the statute, so small and large employers are treated the same.
What counts as "AI analysis" under the Act?
The statute does not define artificial intelligence, and that gap matters. A plain reading covers tools that:
Score facial expressions or micro-expressions during recorded answers.
Analyze vocal tone, pace, or word choice to infer traits like enthusiasm or conscientiousness.
Rank or filter candidates using a machine learning model trained on prior hiring data.
Because there is no statutory definition, employers and vendors disagree on edge cases. A simple keyword-matching filter and a deep neural network that scores "employability" both arguably qualify. Most compliance counsel advise treating any automated scoring of video content as covered, since the cost of notice and consent is low and the risk of guessing wrong is higher.
What did the 2022 amendment add?
Effective January 1, 2022, Illinois amended the Act to address demographic data and adverse impact. The amendment applies to employers that rely solely on AI analysis to decide which applicants advance to an in-person interview.
Those employers must:
Collect and report race and ethnicity of applicants who are and are not offered in-person interviews after AI analysis.
Report race and ethnicity of applicants who are hired.
Submit that data each year to the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity, which reviews it for evidence of racial bias in AI-driven hiring.
This reporting duty is narrow. It only reaches employers that use AI as the sole gatekeeper between the video stage and the in-person stage. An employer that adds any human judgment to that decision sits outside the reporting requirement, though it still owes the original notice, explanation, consent, and deletion duties.
How is the Illinois AI Video Interview Act enforced?
The Act does not spell out an enforcement mechanism, fines, or a private right of action in its own text. This is the most-cited weakness of the law. There is no agency penalty schedule written into the statute and no dollar figure attached to a violation.
In practice, exposure comes from three directions:
General Illinois employment law. Violations may be raised through existing state labor and civil rights channels rather than a dedicated AI penalty.
Other Illinois privacy statutes. Plaintiffs sometimes pair video-interview claims with biometric privacy theories, since facial and vocal analysis can implicate biometric identifiers.
Federal anti-discrimination law. If an AI tool produces a disparate impact, the conduct can be challenged under Title VII or the ADA regardless of the Illinois Act.
The missing penalty means the Act functions partly as a disclosure standard and partly as evidence in broader discrimination or privacy disputes. Employers should not read the absent penalty section as permission to ignore the requirements.
Is video-interview AI also covered by biometric privacy law?
Often, yes. Illinois has a separate biometric privacy framework, and tools that map facial geometry or analyze voiceprints can collect data that those laws treat as biometric identifiers. An employer can satisfy the Video Interview Act and still face a separate claim for collecting biometric data without the consent and retention disclosures that biometric law demands. Treat the two regimes as stacked, not interchangeable.
How does the Illinois law compare to other AI hiring rules?
Illinois was early, but it is now one entry in a growing set of overlapping rules. The table below summarizes major U.S. and EU frameworks that govern AI in hiring as of 2026.
Framework: Illinois AI Video Interview Act (2020)
Scope: AI analysis of video interviews for Illinois-based job roles.
Core obligation: Provide notice, explain the AI's use, obtain candidate consent, delete recordings as required, and submit demographic reporting for systems used as the sole screening method.
Enforcement: No specific statutory penalty; enforcement may occur through other legal or regulatory channels.
Framework: NYC Local Law 144 (enforced July 2023)
Scope: Automated Employment Decision Tools (AEDTs) used for candidates or employees in New York City.
Core obligation: Conduct an annual independent bias audit, publish the audit summary, and provide advance notice to candidates.
Enforcement: Civil penalties ranging from $500 to $1,500 per violation.
Framework: Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205)
Scope: High-risk AI systems, including employment-related AI affecting Colorado consumers.
Core obligation: Exercise reasonable care to prevent algorithmic discrimination through disclosures, risk management, and governance practices.
Enforcement: Enforced by the Colorado Attorney General.
Framework: EU AI Act
Scope: AI systems used in recruitment and hiring, which are classified as high-risk under Annex III.
Core obligation: Implement risk management, data governance, human oversight, technical documentation, and conformity assessment procedures.
Enforcement: Administrative fines under the EU AI Act.
Framework: EEOC guidance (Title VII and ADA)
Scope: AI systems and software used in employment decisions across the United States.
Core obligation: Avoid unlawful disparate impact and provide reasonable accommodations where required.
Enforcement: Federal discrimination charges, investigations, and civil litigation.
One caution on the Colorado entry: the original SB 24-205 framework described above was repealed and replaced by later legislation before it took full effect, with revised rules set to apply in 2027. Confirm Colorado's current text before relying on it. The EU AI Act's high-risk obligations for hiring tools also face a deadline that has shifted, so verify the applicable compliance date for your systems.
The pattern across these rules is consistent: transparency to applicants, testing for discriminatory impact, and accountability for the employer even when a vendor built the tool. Illinois supplies notice and consent; NYC adds an audit; Colorado and the EU add documented risk management. For a state-by-state breakdown of where these rules apply, see The AI Table's guide to AI hiring laws by state.
Why does AI hiring regulation exist at all?
The laws respond to documented cases where automated screening produced biased outcomes, not to speculation.
Amazon's internal recruiting tool. Amazon built an experimental AI recruiting system and reportedly scrapped it around 2018 after finding it down-ranked resumes that signaled women applicants, because it had learned from a male-dominated history of past resumes.
iTutorGroup EEOC settlement. In 2023, the EEOC settled a case in which tutoring company iTutorGroup's software automatically rejected older applicants. The company agreed to pay $365,000 to resolve the age-discrimination claims.
Mobley v. Workday. A lawsuit alleging that Workday's AI-based applicant screening discriminated on the basis of age, race, and disability was allowed to proceed, raising the question of whether an AI vendor can be held liable as an agent of the employers using its software.
These cases share a mechanism. A model trained on historical decisions reproduces the patterns in that history, including discriminatory ones, and then applies them at scale. The Illinois Act addresses one part of this problem, the video-interview stage, by forcing disclosure and consent before an algorithm scores a candidate's face and voice.
What are the practical risks for employers who ignore it?
The direct statutory penalty is unclear, but the indirect exposure is real:
Discrimination liability under Title VII, the ADA, or the ADEA if the tool produces disparate impact.
Biometric privacy claims when facial or voice analysis collects identifiers without proper consent.
Reputational harm with candidates, who increasingly expect disclosure when AI evaluates them.
Compliance cost as more states and the EU add overlapping requirements, making per-state guessing expensive.
Next steps: how to comply with the Illinois AI Video Interview Act
Compliance is procedural and inexpensive relative to the litigation it prevents. Work through these steps before any AI-analyzed video interview for an Illinois role.
Inventory your hiring stack. Identify every vendor and tool that records or scores video interviews, and confirm with each whether AI analysis is applied to the footage.
Draft a plain-language notice. Tell applicants, in advance, that AI may analyze their video and what general characteristics it evaluates. Avoid jargon.
Build a consent step. Capture written or electronic consent before the interview, and provide a non-AI path or alternative for applicants who decline.
Restrict access. Limit video sharing to people whose expertise or technology is needed to evaluate the candidate, and log who has access.
Set a 30-day deletion workflow. Create a process to delete a video, and instruct third parties to delete their copies, within 30 days of an applicant's request.
Check the sole-AI screening question. If AI alone decides who advances to in-person interviews, set up the race and ethnicity reporting required by the 2022 amendment.
Coordinate with biometric and other AI laws. Align your video-interview disclosures with biometric privacy obligations and any NYC, Colorado, or EU requirements that apply to your candidate pool.
Frequently asked questions
When did the Illinois AI Video Interview Act take effect?
The Act took effect on January 1, 2020. A 2022 amendment, effective January 1, 2022, added demographic reporting duties for employers that rely solely on AI analysis to decide which applicants advance to an in-person interview. Both the original requirements and the amendment are in force as of 2026.
Does the Act ban AI video interviews?
No. The Act does not prohibit AI analysis of video interviews. It permits the practice as long as the employer gives notice, explains how the AI works, obtains the applicant's consent, limits who sees the video, and deletes recordings within 30 days of a request. An applicant who declines consent simply cannot be evaluated by the AI tool.
Is there a penalty for violating the Illinois AI Video Interview Act?
The statute does not contain its own penalty schedule or an explicit private right of action. Exposure typically comes through other channels: general Illinois employment and civil rights law, separate biometric privacy claims, and federal anti-discrimination statutes such as Title VII and the ADA when an AI tool produces a discriminatory impact.
Does the law apply to employers outside Illinois?
It applies based on where the position is located, not where the employer is headquartered. An out-of-state company hiring for a role based in Illinois, using AI to analyze video interviews, falls under the Act. Companies with multi-state candidate pools should map each open role to the laws of the state where the job sits.
