Illinois HB 3773

No. The statute names no audit, no assessment and no testing obligation. Liability turns on the outcome. If the tool discriminates in practice, the employer has broken the Human Rights Act. Intent makes no difference, and neither does whether anyone thought to test. Testing is how an employer finds the problem before a complainant does, and how it evidences good faith afterwards.

Nine categories: recruitment, hiring, promotion, renewal of employment, selection for training or apprenticeship, discharge, discipline, tenure and the terms, privileges or conditions of employment. That reaches well past hiring into how existing employees are managed.

The statute makes it a civil rights violation to fail to tell an employee that AI is being used for a covered purpose. The mechanics are unsettled. The Department of Human Rights published proposed rules in May 2026, then withdrew them in June 2026 and cancelled the scheduled hearing. Until final rules land, nobody knows when that notice has to go out, what it must say or how it should reach people. Keep records of where AI touched a decision and be ready to adapt.

Geographic data correlates strongly with race in many US metros, so a model that never sees race can still reproduce racial disparities through location. Illinois names this pattern directly, which makes proxy analysis a required part of any serious testing programme.

Local Law 144 is procedural: run the audit, publish the summary, give notice and you have met the requirement even if the results show disparity. Illinois is substantive: the disparity itself is the violation. Meeting one does not automatically satisfy the other.