AI Interview Disclosure by State: Candidate Rights in 2026

In 2026, there is no single nationwide rule requiring every employer to disclose AI use in an interview. Your rights depend on your location, the employer’s location, and what the system does: record and analyze a video, rank candidates, or make an employment recommendation. Illinois has specific consent and deletion rules for AI-analyzed video interviews; New York City has broader notice and alternative-process requirements for covered tools; federal disability law may require an accommodation. Colorado’s revised protections take effect January 1, 2027.

Key takeaways

• Illinois generally requires notice, general information about the AI’s evaluation, and consent before an employer uses AI to analyze a recorded video interview.
• New York City requires covered employers and agencies to give notice at least 10 business days before using an automated employment decision tool and to identify the qualifications or characteristics assessed.
• The federal baseline is not a general AI-consent rule, but the ADA may require an alternative testing or interview format when an AI assessment disadvantages a qualified applicant with a disability.
• Colorado’s revised automated-decision requirements are scheduled for January 1, 2027, so do not describe them as protections already effective during the 2026 hiring process.
• Save the invitation and disclosure, identify what the tool does, and make consent, alternative-process, or accommodation requests in writing when practical.

An automated employment decision tool, or AEDT, is software that uses automated processing to help assess or make decisions about applicants or employees. An AI interview tool may transcribe speech, analyze a recorded video, score answers, rank applicants, or recommend who advances. Those functions are not legally interchangeable. The first useful question is therefore not simply “Does this employer use AI?” It is “What does the system do with my interview, and where does the relevant hiring process occur?”

Start with the tool, the locations, and the date

Before deciding whether a disclosure or consent rule applies, preserve the original invitation, assessment link, privacy notice, and any instructions shown on screen. Record the employer, the job location, your location during the application, and the date the tool will be used. These details help you ask a precise question instead of assuming that every automated interview falls under the same law.

Next, classify the system’s role. A chatbot that asks screening questions is different from a platform that records a video and analyzes it. A transcription tool may assist a human interviewer without ranking candidates. A scoring system may evaluate answers against stated job characteristics. A recommendation tool may influence who advances. Ask the employer which of these functions is present and whether a human reviews the result.

The date matters too. A law can be enacted without all of its requirements being effective. Colorado illustrates why this distinction belongs at the beginning of your research: the Colorado Attorney General describes Senate Bill 26-189’s revised automated-decision rules as taking effect on January 1, 2027, rather than August 31, 2026. That means a candidate applying in 2026 should not present those revised requirements as currently operative. Check the Colorado Attorney General’s AI information for the date-specific position.

This is a practical classification exercise, not a promise that a particular law applies. Coverage may depend on the employer, the agency, the role, the tool, and the jurisdiction. If the consequences are significant, consider consulting an employment lawyer or the relevant government agency rather than relying on a generalized checklist.

Illinois: consent and deletion for AI-analyzed video interviews

Illinois has the clearest video-specific rule in this brief. Before requesting a recorded video interview that will be analyzed by AI, an employer must notify the applicant that AI may be used, provide information about how the AI works and the general characteristics it evaluates, and obtain the applicant’s consent. The employer cannot use the AI evaluation for an applicant who has not consented, according to the Illinois Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act.

Notice does not have to mean that the employer reveals proprietary source code. The practical issue is whether you receive meaningful general information about the system’s operation and the characteristics it evaluates. A useful follow-up is: “Will the recording be analyzed by an automated system, and what general job-related characteristics or qualifications will that system evaluate?” You can also ask whether the result is a score, a ranking, a recommendation, or one input for a human decision.

If you do not want to consent, do not silently assume that clicking through is the only possible path. Ask how to decline and whether a non-AI process is available. Keep the employer’s answer. Consent, refusal, and any alternative offered can become important facts later, especially if the instructions were unclear or changed after you submitted the recording.

Illinois also provides a deletion route. An applicant may request deletion of the interview, and the employer generally has 30 days to delete it and direct recipients to delete copies. Send the request to the contact identified in the assessment materials or the employer’s privacy notice. Identify the interview date, role, and account email, and ask for written confirmation. Retain your request and any response rather than relying on a verbal assurance.

A concise Illinois message

Before I complete the recorded interview, please confirm whether AI will analyze my recording, the general characteristics it will evaluate, and how I can provide or decline consent. If I consent and later request deletion, please identify the process and contact for that request.

New York City: notice, assessed characteristics, and an alternative process

New York City’s Local Law 144 is broader than a video-only disclosure rule. For a covered employer or employment agency using an automated employment decision tool, candidates must receive notice at least 10 business days before use. The notice must identify the job qualifications and characteristics the tool will assess. The New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection also describes requirements for a bias audit and public availability of audit information. See the agency’s Automated Employment Decision Tools guidance.

The ten-business-day timing changes how you should respond to a last-minute request. If a company sends an automated assessment and asks you to complete it tomorrow, save the timestamp and ask when the required notice was provided. Do not accuse the employer of violating the law based only on a short email; ask for the missing information and give the employer an opportunity to clarify whether the tool is covered.

Ask for the qualifications and characteristics being assessed in concrete terms. For example: “Is the tool evaluating technical knowledge, communication, work history, response content, speech patterns, facial movements, or another category?” The answer may distinguish a tool that compares written qualifications from one that analyzes video or voice signals. It also helps you decide whether the assessment measures a genuine job requirement.

New York City candidates may request an alternative selection process or an accommodation. Make the request before the assessment when possible, state what you need, and connect it to the selection process. You do not need to provide a long medical narrative in an initial message. If the employer directs you to a formal accommodation contact, follow that route and keep the referral.

A concise New York City message

Please provide the notice for the automated employment decision tool, including the qualifications and characteristics it will assess and the date the tool will be used. I am also requesting an alternative selection process because the automated format does not provide an appropriate way for me to demonstrate my qualifications. Please let me know the next step.

Federal disability rights: when to request an accommodation

The federal baseline is not a general requirement that employers obtain consent before using AI. The important federal protection in this context is the Americans with Disabilities Act. The EEOC explains that an algorithmic or AI assessment may screen out a qualified applicant with a disability and that an employer may need to provide a reasonable accommodation, such as an alternative testing format, when necessary to measure job ability more accurately. The agency’s guidance on visual disabilities in the workplace and the ADA discusses this risk.

An accommodation request can be oral or written, and the EEOC states that an applicant is not required to disclose the need at a particular point in the hiring process. Still, a prompt request is usually practical: it gives the employer time to identify another format before a deadline and creates a clear record of what you asked for.

Describe the barrier and the workable alternative. A candidate who cannot reliably complete a facial-expression analysis might request a structured written or live human interview. A candidate whose speech is affected by a disability might request that the employer evaluate the substance of answers through a format that does not penalize the speech-related limitation. The right alternative depends on the job and the assessment; do not assume that every preferred format must be accepted.

You can begin with limited information: “I need a reasonable accommodation for the automated interview because of a disability. I can demonstrate the essential qualifications through a live human interview or written responses. Please tell me whom to contact and whether the deadline can be adjusted.” If the employer reasonably requests supporting information, respond through its accommodation process. Keep the focus on the barrier, the essential job requirements, and a workable way to assess them.

A candidate decision tree and evidence checklist

Use the following sequence when an employer sends an AI interview or assessment. It is an editorial workflow based on the cited Illinois, New York City, EEOC, and Colorado materials; it is not a substitute for a jurisdiction-specific legal opinion.

1. Save the invitation, consent screen, privacy notice, deadline, and any description of automated scoring or ranking.
2. Write down your location, the job location, the employer or agency, and the date the tool will be used.
3. Ask what the system records, analyzes, scores, ranks, or recommends; ask whether a human reviews the result.
4. Check whether Illinois video-consent rules, New York City AEDT rules, federal disability protections, or another applicable requirement may be relevant.
5. If you are in Illinois and the recording will be analyzed by AI, ask for the required general information and consent process before submitting it.
6. If the covered process is in New York City, ask for the notice, assessed qualifications and characteristics, audit information, and any available alternative selection process.
7. If a disability creates a barrier, request an accommodation or alternative format in writing and explain the assessment problem rather than oversharing medical details.
8. Record whether you consented, declined, requested deletion, requested an alternative, or requested an accommodation. Save all confirmations and revised deadlines.

A refusal is not the same as a technical failure. If the employer says there is no alternative, ask whether that is because the tool is essential to the process, whether a human review is available, and whom you can contact with an accommodation request. Keep your tone factual. Your goal is to clarify the process and preserve evidence, not to debate an unknown algorithm.

How to judge an unclear disclosure

A disclosure that merely says “technology may be used” leaves important questions unanswered. Look for four elements: the type of data collected, the purpose of the tool, the general qualifications or characteristics assessed, and the effect of the result on the hiring decision. A company may be using AI for transcription, scheduling, question generation, evaluation, or ranking; those uses carry different practical implications.

You can ask questions without treating the tool as automatically unlawful. Try: “Is participation optional?” “Will declining affect my candidacy?” “What does the system evaluate?” “Is my recording shared with a vendor?” “How long is it retained?” “Can a person review my application without the automated result?” These questions also help you prepare honestly: if the tool evaluates answer content, organize examples around the job; if it evaluates a recorded format that creates a disability barrier, request another method.

Avoid making unsupported claims about what the system can infer. A candidate usually cannot determine from a score alone whether an employer assessed facial movement, accent, confidence, or job knowledge. Ask for the employer’s description, retain the result if provided, and compare the stated evaluation criteria with the role’s actual requirements. If the explanation is inconsistent or the process appears to penalize a disability, document the inconsistency and seek qualified advice.

Conclusion: make the process specific before you consent

AI interview disclosure is a jurisdiction-and-tool question, not a nationwide yes-or-no rule. In Illinois, focus on notice, general information, consent, and deletion for AI-analyzed recorded video interviews. In New York City, focus on the ten-business-day notice, assessed qualifications and characteristics, bias-audit information, and the right to request an alternative process or accommodation for covered tools. For disability-related barriers anywhere in the United States, consider a prompt ADA accommodation request. For Colorado, label the revised requirements accurately: the cited changes are scheduled for January 1, 2027, not generally effective during 2026.

The most useful habit is simple: preserve the disclosure, identify what the tool does, ask targeted questions, and put important requests in writing. That approach does not assume every AI assessment is covered by one law. It gives you a clearer basis for deciding whether to consent, request another format, ask for an accommodation, or seek jurisdiction-specific help.