HomeCompliance GuidesNew York

New York City AI Hiring Law (Local Law 144): Bias-Audit Compliance for Employers

In effect Primary law: NYC AEDT Bias Audit Law (LL 144) · NYC Local Law 144 of 2021; NYC Admin. Code §§ 20-870 to 20-874

If you use an automated tool to screen, rank, or score candidates for jobs based in New York City — an AI resume screener, a scoring algorithm, an automated video assessment — New York City Local Law 144 requires you to have that tool independently bias-audited before you use it, post the results, and notify candidates. In effect since July 5, 2023 and enforced by the NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP), it is the first US law to mandate a bias audit for AI hiring. On top of it, federal anti-discrimination law applies everywhere.

What the law requires

Who must comply

Employers and employment agencies that use an automated employment decision tool to substantially assist or replace discretionary decision-making when screening candidates or employees for positions located in New York City. The obligation attaches to the NYC job location, not your headquarters — a company anywhere that hires for an NYC role and uses a covered tool must comply.

Penalties & enforcement

Civil penalties are $500 for a first violation, and $500–$1,500 for each subsequent violation. Critically, each day a noncompliant AEDT is used is a separate violation, and a failure to provide the required notice is a separate violation each day — so penalties accumulate quickly. DCWP enforces. Separately, an AI hiring tool that produces discriminatory outcomes can trigger far larger federal Title VII / ADA liability regardless of whether you ran a bias audit.

How to comply: a practical checklist

Get an alert the moment this changes

AI law moves fast — effective dates shift, rules get repealed and replaced, new bills pass. Create a free AI Laws USA account, watch the laws on this page, and get an email the moment one of them moves, takes effect, or is challenged. Free for the public, journalists, and students.

Create a free account & set alerts → See team plans

The laws this guide is built on

Every claim above traces to one of these verified entries in our index. Each links to its full record and its official source. Status labels reflect the live dataset as of 2026-06-17.

  1. In effect Stronger protection

    NYC AEDT Bias Audit Law (LL 144)

    New York City, NY · Effective 2023-01-01 · NYC Local Law 144 of 2021; NYC Admin. Code §§ 20-870 to 20-874

    Employers and employment agencies in New York City may not use AI hiring or promotion tools unless the tool has passed an independent bias audit within the past year. Job candidates must be told an automated tool is being used and can request information about the data it relies on.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Stronger protection

    Title VII / ADA (AI hiring)

    United States · Effective 1965-07-02 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.

    Federal anti-discrimination law applies when employers use AI tools to screen resumes, score interviews, or rank candidates: if an AI tool disproportionately screens out people by race, sex, disability, or other protected traits, the employer can be liable. The EEOC's specific AI guidance documents from 2023 were removed in January 2025, but the underlying laws are unchanged and still enforceable.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Moderate protection

    EEOC AI Title VII Guidance

    United States · Effective 2023-05-18 · EEOC TA (May 18, 2023)

    EEOC guidance applying Title VII disparate-impact analysis to AI hiring tools. Employers are liable for discriminatory outcomes even when the tool is built by a vendor.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. Blocked / in litigation Limited protection

    Mobley v. Workday (AI Hiring Bias)

    United States · Mobley v. Workday, Inc., No. 3:23-cv-00770 (N.D. Cal.)

    Derek Mobley's collective action suit in federal court alleges that Workday's AI hiring and screening tools systematically discriminated against Black, disabled, and older job applicants — denying him hundreds of opportunities. As of June 2026, the case has survived multiple dismissal motions; a court authorized notice to class members in February 2026 (March 7 opt-in deadline), and the court rejected Workday's argument that older workers can't be 'applicants' under the ADEA. The case is in discovery and could establish landmark precedent on AI vendor liability.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

Browse all New York AI laws in the directory →  ·  See the employment topic →  ·  New York jurisdiction overview →

Frequently asked questions

What is an 'automated employment decision tool' under Local Law 144?
It's a computational process — including one derived from machine learning or AI — that issues a score, classification, or recommendation used to substantially assist or replace discretionary decisions about hiring or promotion. See the Local Law 144 entry and NYC DCWP's official guidance.
We're not in NYC — do we still have to comply?
If the position is located in New York City and you use a covered AEDT to screen candidates, the law applies regardless of where your company is based.
How often do we need the bias audit?
The independent bias audit must have been conducted within the prior 12 months for the tool you're using, so in practice you re-audit at least annually.
What are the fines?
$500 for a first violation and $500–$1,500 for each subsequent violation, with each day of noncompliant use counting as a separate violation. NYC DCWP enforces.
Does federal law also regulate AI hiring?
Yes. Title VII and the ADA apply to AI hiring tools nationwide, the EEOC has issued guidance on assessing adverse impact from algorithms, and cases like Mobley v. Workday are testing AI-vendor liability — so a passing bias audit does not immunize you from federal discrimination claims.