Illinois Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act

What the law requires

The act applies when an employer asks applicants to record video interviews and uses artificial intelligence to analyze the videos, for positions based in Illinois. Before asking for the video, the employer must:

1. Notify the applicant that AI may be used to analyze the interview and consider their fitness for the position.
2. Explain how the AI works and what general types of characteristics it uses to evaluate applicants.
3. Get consent from the applicant to be evaluated by the AI program as described.

After collection, the employer:

• May not use AI to evaluate applicants who have not consented.
• May share videos only with people whose expertise or technology is necessary to evaluate the applicant's fitness.
• Must delete an applicant's videos, and have anyone who received copies delete theirs, within 30 days of the applicant's request.

The act does not define "artificial intelligence" and sets no specific penalty or private right of action, which leaves room for interpretation. Most employers read it broadly.

Demographic reporting

An amendment effective January 1, 2022 added a reporting duty for employers that rely solely on AI analysis of video interviews to decide whether an applicant gets an in-person interview. They must collect and report, each year, the race and ethnicity of applicants who were and were not offered an in-person interview after the AI analysis, and of those hired. Reports go to the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity, which analyzes whether the data shows racial bias in AI use.

Where it fits with other Illinois law

Two other Illinois laws often apply to the same interview:

• [BIPA](/glossary/bipa/): if the tool extracts face geometry or a voiceprint, separate written consent and a published retention policy are required, with a private right of action and statutory damages.
• HB 3773, effective January 1, 2026, amends the Illinois Human Rights Act. It covers AI used in recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline and other employment decisions, prohibits AI use that has the effect of discriminating on protected classes, bars using zip codes as a proxy for protected classes and requires employers to give notice when AI is used. Unlike AIVIA, it is enforced through the state's civil rights process.

In practice, a single candidate notice and consent screen often covers all three, as long as each law's specific content is included.

Worked example

A national insurer hires 200 claims representatives a year in Chicago using a one-way video interview platform that produces an AI score. Its compliant flow: the interview invitation links to a plain-language explanation of what the AI evaluates (for example, answer content against job-related competencies), the candidate ticks a consent box before recording, and those who decline are offered a live phone interview with a recruiter. A request-to-delete form routes to the vendor with a 30-day deadline. Because recruiters review every video before deciding on in-person interviews, the company does not rely solely on AI and is not subject to the reporting duty, but it keeps the data in case that changes.

Common mistakes

• Burying notice in a privacy policy instead of giving it before the interview.
• Vague explanations like "our AI evaluates your fit." Say what characteristics are evaluated.
• No route for applicants who decline. Offering an alternative, such as a live interview, is good practice and lowers accommodation and discrimination risk.
• Losing track of copies shared with hiring managers or vendors when a deletion request arrives.
• Assuming only face analysis counts. Transcript scoring by an AI interview tool is still AI analysis of a video interview.

This is general information; requirements may change and counsel should review your flow.