Illinois HB 3773 (AI in Employment Decisions)
Compliance reference — obligations, penalties, applicability, and primary sources. For the full statutory picture in this jurisdiction, see Illinois AI laws.
Last verified August 8, 2026
Summary
Illinois HB 3773, enacted as Public Act 103-0804 and codified inside the Illinois Human Rights Act at 775 ILCS 5/2-102 (as amended), has been in force since January 1, 2026. It makes it a civil rights violation for an employer to use artificial intelligence that has the effect of subjecting employees or applicants to discrimination on the basis of a protected class. The covered employment decisions include recruitment, hiring, promotion, renewal of employment, selection for training or apprenticeship, discharge, discipline, tenure, and terms, privileges, or conditions of employment.
The official Public Act text also prohibits using zip codes as a proxy for protected classes and requires employers to provide notice when AI is used for the covered employment purposes. The Illinois Department of Human Rights (IDHR) is directed to adopt implementation and enforcement rules, including the circumstances requiring notice, the timing of notice, and the means for providing notice.
How this law is cited
One Illinois enactment carries three different identifiers, and law-firm alerts, agency material and search results use them interchangeably. All three name the same law.
| Identifier | Form | What it names |
|---|---|---|
| IdentifierHB 3773 | FormBill number, 103rd General Assembly | What it namesThe bill as introduced and passed |
| IdentifierPublic Act 103-0804 | FormPublic Act number | What it namesThe enrolled law as approved August 9, 2024 |
| Identifier775 ILCS 5/2-102 (as amended) | FormIllinois Compiled Statutes citation | What it namesThe codified text now in force inside the Illinois Human Rights Act |
The distinction matters for compliance work: HB 3773 is an amending act, not a standalone AI statute. The operative obligations, the protected classes they attach to, and the remedies for breaching them all live in the Illinois Human Rights Act, so an obligations analysis runs against the IHRA as amended rather than against the bill text alone. [Source: Public Act 103-0804, retrieved 2026-08-08.]
Compliance timeline
| Date | Event | Status |
|---|---|---|
| DateAugust 9, 2024 | EventHB 3773 approved and enrolled as Public Act 103-0804 | StatusComplete |
| DateJanuary 1, 2026 | EventStatutory amendments to the Illinois Human Rights Act take effect | StatusIn force |
| DateMay 15, 2026 | EventIDHR proposed amendments to Title 44, Part 2520 of the Illinois Administrative Code published in the Illinois Register; 45-day public comment period opens | StatusSuperseded by the June 2 postponement |
| DateJune 2, 2026 | EventIDHR temporarily postpones the rulemaking, expressly including the scheduled hearing | StatusCurrent status |
| DateJune 10, 2026 | EventPublic hearing on the proposed rules (as originally scheduled) | StatusPostponed |
| DateJune 29, 2026 | EventWritten comments due (as originally scheduled) | StatusPostponed with the rulemaking |
| DateNot published | EventRevised IDHR rulemaking timeline | StatusNone as of the August 8, 2026 review of this record |
The notice requirement: what binds today and what awaits rules
The notice obligation is split across two layers, which is why "does Illinois require employers to disclose AI use in hiring?" has two different answers depending on what is being asked.
In force since January 1, 2026 (statute). The Public Act itself requires an employer to provide notice when AI is used for the covered employment purposes, alongside the anti-discrimination duty and the zip-code proxy prohibition. That statutory duty took effect with the rest of the amendments and does not wait on rulemaking.
Still pending (administrative rules). The circumstances that require notice, the timing of notice, and the means for providing it are the three items the Public Act directs IDHR to specify by rule. Those are the details IDHR's Part 2520 proposal would have supplied, and they are what the June 2, 2026 postponement left unresolved. Employers therefore have a live notice duty with no rule-level specification of form or timing. [Source: Public Act 103-0804 and IDHR legislative update, retrieved 2026-08-08.]
IDHR rulemaking status
IDHR published proposed amendments to Title 44, Part 2520 of the Illinois Administrative Code in the Illinois Register on May 15, 2026, opening a 45-day public comment period (written comments due June 29, 2026) and scheduling a June 10, 2026 public hearing. On June 2, 2026 IDHR temporarily postponed the rulemaking, including that hearing, stating the postponement was necessary to allow for continued collaboration with other state agencies and that it would provide updated next steps. As of August 8, 2026, IDHR's official update still gave no revised timeline for the withdrawn proposal. Throughout, the statutory anti-discrimination, zip-code proxy, and notice requirements have remained effective since January 1, 2026; only the detailed notice timing, means, and conditions rules are still pending. [Sources: Public Act 103-0804 and IDHR legislative update, retrieved 2026-08-08.]
Two source-availability notes recorded on August 15, 2026, neither of which changes the obligations above: IDHR's dedicated artificial-intelligence-in-employment legislative-update page returned HTTP 404 during an IDHR site restructure, with the agency's legislative-updates index still live; and ilga.gov, which publishes the official Public Act text, refused connections on port 443 from two independent networks, so the statutory text was not re-read on that date.
Enforcement and remedies
Enforcement is via the Illinois Department of Human Rights complaint process. Remedies follow standard IHRA procedures and may include actual damages, civil penalties, attorney's fees, and injunctive relief — there is no fixed per-violation cap written into the AI provisions.
Frequently asked questions
What is Illinois Public Act 103-0804?
Public Act 103-0804 is the Public Act number for Illinois HB 3773, approved August 9, 2024. It amends the Illinois Human Rights Act to regulate employer use of artificial intelligence in employment decisions, and its provisions took effect January 1, 2026. The same law is cited as HB 3773, as Public Act 103-0804, and as 775 ILCS 5/2-102 (as amended).
Does Illinois HB 3773 require employers to notify applicants that AI is used?
Yes. The Public Act requires employers to provide notice when AI is used for the covered employment purposes, and that statutory duty has been in effect since January 1, 2026. The circumstances requiring notice, the timing of the notice, and the means of providing it are left to IDHR rules, which were proposed on May 15, 2026 and postponed on June 2, 2026, so no rule-level form or deadline is currently specified.
When did Illinois HB 3773 take effect?
The statutory amendments took effect January 1, 2026. The law was approved as Public Act 103-0804 on August 9, 2024, giving employers roughly 17 months between enactment and the effective date.
Have there been amendments to Public Act 103-0804 since it was enacted?
As of the August 8, 2026 verification of this record, no further statutory amendment to the AI provisions had been recorded. What remains outstanding is administrative rulemaking by IDHR, not a change to the statute — a distinction worth holding, because a postponed rulemaking does not suspend the statutory duties already in force.
Which agency enforces Illinois HB 3773, and what are the penalties?
The Illinois Department of Human Rights administers and enforces the provisions through the standard IHRA charge process. Remedies follow standard IHRA procedures and may include actual damages, civil penalties, attorney's fees, and injunctive relief; the AI provisions carry no fixed per-violation penalty cap.
Does HB 3773 restrict the use of zip codes in hiring algorithms?
Yes. Separately from the general anti-discrimination duty, the Public Act prohibits an employer from using zip codes as a proxy for protected classes. This is a standalone prohibition, so a zip-code proxy can be a violation without a separate showing of discriminatory effect through another route.
Related employment AI pages
For adjacent employment-AI regimes in the Atlas, compare NYC Local Law 144 and New Jersey A 3854. Use the HR & Hiring industry hub when the same hiring workflow spans multiple jurisdictions.
Vendor and procurement routes
- AI vendor due diligence questionnaire
Build the evidence request for an employment-AI supplier. HB 3773 amends the Illinois Human Rights Act to reach the employer’s use of the tool, so procurement language is a recovery mechanism rather than a compliance control.
Key obligations
Specific compliance requirements derived from the primary source. Each item links to the relevant statutory section where applicable.
- GovernanceRole: deployer775 ILCS 5/2-102(L)
Refrain from using AI that has the effect of subjecting employees or applicants to discrimination on the basis of protected classes under the Illinois Human Rights Act in employment decisions.
DeadlineOngoing
- DisclosureRole: deployer775 ILCS 5/2-102(L)
Provide notice to employees and applicants when AI is being used to make employment-related decisions covered by the amended IHRA.
DeadlineAt use
Related comparisons
Use the side-by-side comparisons to see how this law interacts with adjacent US AI laws and governance frameworks.
- NYC Local Law 144 vs Illinois HB 3773
Compare source-backed hiring-law records, applicability, and obligation categories.
Build a compliance program around these obligations
A single law is one input to a broader program. These guides show how to assign accountability, map every obligation to a control, and split developer-versus-deployer duties across the systems a team operates.
- AI governance: building an AI compliance program
The operating model — owners, committee, decision rights, lifecycle gates — that turns a law into an accountable, auditable program anchored to the NIST AI RMF GOVERN function.
- AI compliance framework: the regulatory control map
How to map each AI system to the laws it triggers, the controls that satisfy them, and the evidence that proves the controls operate.
- Deployer vs developer obligations
Which duties attach to building an AI system versus putting one into use — the split most state AI laws turn on.
Sources
Every fact above is sourced from the official primary source. Independent verification recommended before acting on the information.
- Officialilga.gov — 775 ILCS 5/2-102 (as amended)
- ilga.gov
- www.ilga.gov
- www.ilga.gov
- dhr.illinois.gov
- dhr.illinois.gov
Last reviewed August 8, 2026. Reviewed by the AI Compliance Atlas editorial process against primary sources. Source selection, retrieval dates, and update rules are documented in the Atlas methodology.
We may receive referral commissions from recommended compliance tools. Recommendations are based on product fit and not on commission size. Links marked “partner link” include a tracked redirect.