IL AIVIA
Illinois AI Video Interview Act
Requires notice, consent, and transparency for AI analysis of video job interviews. Early state-level AI employment regulation.
Jurisdiction
Illinois
Enacted
Aug 9, 2019
Effective
Jan 1, 2020
Enforcement
No explicit enforcement body designated in statute
Why It Matters
First US law regulating AI in hiring. Narrow but established precedent for employment AI transparency.
At a Glance
Applies to
Harms addressed
Requires
Who Must Comply
- Employers using AI to analyze video interviews
Obligations fall on:
Safety Provisions
- Notice before AI analysis of video interviews
- Consent requirement from candidates
- Transparency about how AI is used
- Data deletion upon request
Compliance & Enforcement
Penalties
No explicit penalties specified in statute. Unlike Illinois BIPA, no private right of action provided.
View on map
Illinois
Focus Areas
Cite This
APA
Illinois. (2019). Illinois AI Video Interview Act.
Related Regulations
IL AI Employment Law
Amends Illinois Human Rights Act to make it a civil rights violation for employers to use AI that discriminates based on protected classes in employment decisions. Requires notice to employees and applicants when AI is used in hiring, firing, promotion, or discipline.
IL SB 315
Frontier-model AI safety law requiring large AI developers to publish and annually update catastrophic-risk frameworks, undergo independent third-party safety audits, report safety incidents to the state, and protect whistleblowers. Would be the first US law mandating independent third-party audits of frontier AI developers.
NYC LL 144
First-in-world law mandating bias audits for AI hiring tools. Requires annual independent audits and public disclosure of results.
CA SB 947
Adds Labor Code Part 5.5.5 on employers' use of automated decision systems (ADS). Bars using an ADS to violate labor or civil rights law, to infer an employee's protected status, or to predict and act against workers exercising legal rights; bars relying solely on an ADS for disciplinary or termination decisions and requires human corroboration where an ADS output is the primary basis; and requires a written post-use notice and, on request, a description of the employee's data used. Operative July 1, 2027.
CA AB 2246
Repeals and replaces the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act. Requires a business providing an online service, product or feature likely to be accessed by children to estimate the age of child users with a reasonable level of certainty or extend child protections to all users, to configure high-privacy defaults, and to take reasonable steps to prevent specified harms including severe psychological harm. Removes the exceptions to the data-collection prohibitions, lets children void contracts entered through manipulative design features, and states that it creates no private right of action.
CA SB 503
Requires developers and deployers of AI clinical decision support systems used by health facilities, clinics and physician practices to make reasonable efforts to identify systems with a known or reasonably foreseeable risk of biased impacts on people with protected characteristics. Developers must mitigate those risks and give deployers an intended-use and risk statement plus documentation on training data, evaluation and data governance; deployers must regularly monitor the systems and mitigate.
Last updated January 23, 2026. Verify against primary sources before relying on this information.