Skip to main content
NOPE
Low reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed

Harper v. Sirius XM: an applicant says AI screening tools rejected nearly all of about 150 job applications on the basis of race; the company denies using AI in hiring and a federal court dismissed the complaint without prejudice

Arshon Harper, a job applicant from Detroit, sued Sirius XM Radio in August 2025, alleging that AI screening tools in the iCIMS applicant tracking system rejected him because of his race. According to the complaint, as recited by the court, he applied for about 150 positions between November 2023 and November 2024 and all but one application was rejected before the interview stage. Sirius XM's EEOC position statement says it has never used iCIMS or any AI tool in hiring, and the company says it told the plaintiff's counsel the same; the court excluded that statement from its ruling. On 30 September 2026 a federal judge in Michigan dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The judge held that, even assuming AI was used, the complaint did not explain how it could have discriminated against him. The rejections and the AI connection are allegations, and the AI connection is disputed.

AI system
iCIMS AI screening tools (reported)
iCIMS
Occurred
1 Nov 2023 to 30 Nov 2024
Reported
1 October 2026
Event location
Unknown
What the AI did
Relation unknown
Reported harm
Professional Harm
Whose AI use
An institution’s AI use
Setting
Work
Evidence
AI involvement disputed · Causal attribution disputed · 2 sources
5 claims: 4 documented, 1 disputed. 3 open questions
People reported harmed
1 person

AI system as recorded: AI and machine-learning features of the iCIMS applicant tracking system (candidate matching and shortlisting), alleged by the plaintiff on information and belief; Sirius XM denies using them

What Happened

The applications. The court's order recites the complaint's account: from November 2023 to November 2024 Harper, an African American applicant from Detroit with a business degree and IT experience, applied for 'approximately 150 positions with Sirius XM' in IT support and software roles. All but one application was rejected before the interview stage, and after a 30-minute interview for an IT Desktop Support role in late 2023 he was rejected. He says he used several email addresses to avoid suspected algorithmic penalties for repeat applications.

The AI allegation. The complaint alleges, 'upon information and belief', that Sirius XM used the iCIMS applicant tracking system and associated AI and machine-learning features, such as candidate matching and shortlisting, which evaluate applicants on data points acting as proxies for race (schools, employment history, zip codes). Harper filed an EEOC charge on 22 November 2024, received a right-to-sue letter on 6 May 2025 and filed suit on 4 August 2025, claiming economic and non-economic harm.

The company's position. Sirius XM's EEOC position statement, as quoted in the order, says it 'does not, nor has it ever, used iCIMS or any other AI/Machine Learning tool in the hiring process', and the company says it later told the plaintiff the same through his counsel. The court excluded the position statement from its consideration of the motion and did not decide whether the company used AI.

The ruling. On 30 September 2026 Judge Terrence G. Berg of the Eastern District of Michigan granted Sirius XM judgment on the pleadings and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The judge held that, even assuming the company used AI in hiring, the complaint offered no comparator group or statistics showing a disparity and did not allege how the tools collected racial data about Harper or affected his hiring decision.

Limits. The complaint itself (ECF No. 1) is an image scan that was not text-read; its content is taken from the court's order. Bloomberg Law's report was read only up to its paywall.

Reported harm

The applicant says all but one of about 150 applications to Sirius XM were rejected before interview and attributes this to race discrimination by AI screening tools; the employer denies using AI and the court found the complaint did not plausibly link any tool to discrimination (allegation, disputed).

Outcome

Resolved

Complaint dismissed without prejudice on 30 September 2026 (E.D. Mich., No. 2:25-cv-12403, ECF No. 19) on Sirius XM's motion for judgment on the pleadings.

What remains unknown

  • Whether Sirius XM used any AI or machine-learning screening tool on these applications.
  • Why the applications were rejected.
  • Whether the plaintiff will amend, refile or appeal.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: disputed. The applicant alleges, on information and belief, that iCIMS AI screening features made or shaped the rejections, which would be a decision about him. Sirius XM says it has never used iCIMS or any AI tool in hiring, and the court did not decide the question. Because the AI system's role in any decision about him is not established, the relation is recorded as unknown.

5 claims: 4 documented, 1 disputed. What the statuses mean

Documented On 4 August 2025 Arshon Harper filed a proposed class action against Sirius XM Radio in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging race discrimination under Title VII and Section 1981 through the company's alleged use of AI-powered recruiting tools to screen applications.

Causal attribution. Established by the court's order, which recites the filing.

  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'On August 4, 2025, he filed the instant federal lawsuit alleging race discrimination'; 'specifically through its alleged use of AI-powered recruiting tools integrated into the ATS that Defendant uses to screen applications'; 'brings a class'; 'alleging employment discrimination in violation of Title VII and'
Documented The complaint, as recited in the court's order, alleges that from November 2023 to November 2024 Harper applied for approximately 150 positions at Sirius XM for which he was qualified, that all but one application was rejected before the interview stage, and that after one 30-minute interview he was also rejected.

Causal attribution. The order documents the content of the complaint; the rejections themselves are allegations that the court accepted as true only for the purpose of the motion.

  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'he applied for'; 'approximately 150 positions with Sirius XM'; 'all but one of his applications were rejected before the interview stage'; 'he received a 30-minute interview for a role in IT Desktop Support, but was rejected post-interview'
  • news.bloomberglaw.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'Harper applied to 150 job openings at Sirius XM and was rejected for each, receiving only one interview.'
Disputed Sirius XM used AI and machine-learning features of the iCIMS applicant tracking system, such as candidate matching and shortlisting, to screen and reject job applicants, and those tools evaluate applicants using data points that act as proxies for race, such as educational institutions, employment history and zip codes. The complaint alleges this, partly upon information and belief, as recited in the court's order; Sirius XM says it has never used iCIMS or any AI tool in hiring, and the court did not decide the question.

Causal attribution. The plaintiff's allegation as recited by the court, contested by the company's stated position; unresolved.

  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'utilizes algorithmic decisionmaking tools provided by third-party vendor iCIMS in its hiring process'; 'such as candidate-matching and shortlisting features'; 'Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief that the iCIMS AI/ML tools used by Sirius XM evaluate applicants using data points that act as proxies for race'; 'such as educational institutions, employment history, and zip codes'
  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) contradicts · English
    'does not, nor has it ever, used iCIMS or any other AI/Machine Learning tool in the hiring process'
  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) context · English
    'Even assuming that Defendant uses AI/ML in the hiring process'
Documented The order records Sirius XM's position, quoted from its EEOC position statement, that it 'does not, nor has it ever, used iCIMS or any other AI/Machine Learning tool in the hiring process', and the company's contention that it told the plaintiff it does not use AI during the EEOC process and later through his counsel. The court excluded the position statement from its consideration of the motion.

Causal attribution. The order records the company's position and contention; the court excluded the position statement and did not decide whether the company used AI.

  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'does not, nor has it ever, used iCIMS or any other AI/Machine Learning tool in the hiring process'; 'Defendant maintains that it previously communicated to Plaintiff that it does not use AI'; 'The Court therefore excludes the EEOC Statement'
Documented On 30 September 2026 Judge Terrence G. Berg granted Sirius XM judgment on the pleadings and dismissed the complaint without prejudice, holding that even assuming the company used AI in hiring, Harper had not pleaded facts explaining how it could have been used to discriminate against him by race.

Causal attribution. The order itself.

  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'Even assuming that Defendant uses AI/ML in the hiring process, Plaintiff has not pleaded factual allegations sufficient to explain how'; 'DIMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE'; 'Dated: September 30, 2026'
  • news.bloomberglaw.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'failed to establish a viable claim of employment discrimination, regardless of whether the company actually uses the artificial intelligence tools that he alleged'

Sources

2 sources inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Read in English on 2026-10-02: Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 19, Harper v. Sirius XM Radio, LLC, No. 2:25-cv-12403 (E.D. Mich. 30 September 2026), 20 pages, free RECAP copy. Applies to s1.

Read in English on 2026-10-02 up to the paywall (headline and first three paragraphs of the Bloomberg Law report by Chris Marr, 1 October 2026). Applies to s2.

Event countries: Unknown. Affected-person countries: United States. Court countries: United States.

The order describes the plaintiff as from Detroit, Michigan, and the case was decided in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. It does not say where the applications were processed, so no event country is recorded.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-02: Published as a contextual case of an applicant who attributes repeated job rejections to an employer's alleged AI screening, with the employer's denial and the dismissal on the pleadings recorded from the court order. The plaintiff sues in his own name; the AI connection is disputed and unestablished.

People described

An African American job applicant from Detroit, Michigan, the plaintiff

People reported harmed in this case

1 person

0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed

One person: the plaintiff, who reports the rejections. No other class members are identified (the order notes none). He was an applicant to an employer that allegedly used the tool, so he is counted among people affected through institutional use. Exact 1.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#lawsuit#hiring#employment#applicant-screening#icims#race-discrimination#dismissed

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). Harper v. Sirius XM: an applicant says AI screening tools rejected nearly all of about 150 job applications on the basis of race; the company denies using AI in hiring and a federal court dismissed the complaint without prejudice. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2023-harper-v-sirius-xm-alleged-ai-hiring-screening

BibTeX

@misc{2023_harper_v_sirius_xm_alleged_ai_hiring_screening,
  title = {Harper v. Sirius XM: an applicant says AI screening tools rejected nearly all of about 150 job applications on the basis of race; the company denies using AI in hiring and a federal court dismissed the complaint without prejudice},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2023-harper-v-sirius-xm-alleged-ai-hiring-screening}
}

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents