Illinois AI Laws: HB 3773, SB 315 and More (2027)

As of November 2026, Illinois has not enacted a law that regulates AI in general; it regulates AI by subject, chiefly through HB 3773 (775 ILCS 5/2-102(L)), which bars discriminatory AI use in employment, and the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act (SB 315, Public Act 104-0538), which reaches frontier AI developers from January 1, 2027.

Status as of November 4, 2026: HB 3773, the AI Video Interview Act and the AI therapy law (HB 1806) are in force. SB 315 is signed but not yet in force. It takes effect January 1, 2027, and its framework and audit duties start in 2028. We found no Department of Human Rights AI rule in force; its proposed rule was withdrawn by June 26, 2026, per the Flinn Report. The Illinois chatbot and consumer AI bills listed below have not passed both chambers.

This page covers Illinois state law and gives one short note on the federal layer. For other states, start with our AI laws hub. This is general legal information, not legal advice.

Does Illinois Have an AI Law?

Yes, several, but none of them regulates AI in general. As of November 4, 2026, by our count of enacted laws, no state has a comprehensive AI statute. Colorado's rewritten automated-decision act covers consequential decisions across several sectors, and it applies to decisions made on or after January 1, 2027. Texas's HB 149 also reaches across sectors, but it mainly bars a list of intentional uses. California, New York and Illinois regulate by subject.

Our search for a comprehensive Illinois statute covered named bills, the Public Acts list for the 104th General Assembly and web searches. It was not a full-text sweep of every act, so read "we found no" on this page in that light.

HB 3773: AI in Employment Under the Illinois Human Rights Act

HB 3773 (P.A. 103-0804) was approved by the Governor on August 9, 2024 and took effect January 1, 2026. It added subsection (L) to the employment section of the Illinois Human Rights Act. Paragraph (1) makes this a civil rights violation:

"With respect to recruitment, hiring, promotion, renewal of employment, selection for training or apprenticeship, discharge, discipline, tenure, or the terms, privileges, or conditions of employment, for an employer to use artificial intelligence that has the effect of subjecting employees to discrimination on the basis of protected classes under this Article or to use zip codes as a proxy for protected classes under this Article."

Three points follow from that text. The discrimination prong turns on effect, not intent. The zip-code ban is written as a separate prohibition. And the covered decisions run well past hiring, to discipline, discharge and the terms of employment.

What Counts as AI Under HB 3773

The Act defines artificial intelligence at 775 ILCS 5/2-101(N) as "a machine-based system that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments." Generative AI has its own definition at subsection (O). The enrolled act lettered these (M) and (N), so older summaries may differ.

Which Illinois Employers Are Covered

The definition of "employer" in 2-101(B) includes "Any person employing one or more employees within Illinois during 20 or more calendar weeks within the calendar year of or preceding the alleged violation." It also includes the State and its political subdivisions, units of government and agencies, without regard to the number of employees. Other categories appear in the same definition.

The Notice Duty

Paragraph (2) makes it a violation "For an employer to fail to provide notice to an employee that the employer is using artificial intelligence for the purposes described in paragraph (1)."

The notice duty names "an employee." Section 2-101(A) defines that term to include "An applicant for any apprenticeship," and it does not list job applicants generally. Hiring is a covered purpose in paragraph (1), but the statute does not say whether notice runs to other job applicants, and we found no rule that answers it. The same paragraph tells the Department to adopt rules on when notice is required, how long in advance, and by what means.

What HB 3773 Does Not Say

Subsection (L) contains no bias-audit requirement, no recordkeeping duty, no clause on vendors or agents, and no "influence or facilitate" standard. The Department's proposed rule would have added recordkeeping, and that proposal was withdrawn.

An older Department rule still applies. 56 Ill. Adm. Code 2520.110 requires employers subject to the Act to keep applications, interview forms, examinations and personnel files, "to the extent that they may exist," for one year from the application date or, for personnel files, from separation. Once a charge is served, the respondent must keep all records pertaining to it until final adjudication.

As of November 4, 2026, by our count of enacted laws and subject to the search limits shown on our AI laws hub, New York City is the only place we found with a bias-audit requirement, and it is a city law.

IDHR Rules: Proposed, Then Withdrawn

We found no AI rule in force from the Department of Human Rights (IDHR). It published proposed amendments to 56 Ill. Adm. Code 2520 (50 Ill. Reg. 6794) on May 15, 2026. The Flinn Report for that date said they would require employers "to disclose and keep records of their use of AI" and set a June 10, 2026 hearing.

As proposed, per that report, notice would have gone to job applicants in the job notice or posting, and to current employees and bargaining representatives at least 30 days before adopting a new or updated AI system and annually after that. Hiring and personnel records would have been kept for 3 years, up from 1.

The proposal was withdrawn by June 26, 2026, per the Flinn Report, which says "DHR is withdrawing the proposed amendments to further consult and collaborate with other State agencies." We found no refiled proposal in the 18 weekly Flinn Reports from July 6 through October 30, 2026, and the Part 2520 section list shows no AI section. The Flinn Report summarizes the Illinois Register, and we did not search the Register itself. Guides that present the draft's notice and recordkeeping terms as current requirements are out of date.

How HB 3773 Is Enforced

HB 3773 uses the Human Rights Act's ordinary procedure. A charge may be filed with IDHR within 2 years after the alleged violation. In some outcomes, the Act gives the complainant 90 days to file with the Human Rights Commission or start a civil action in circuit court.

On finding a civil rights violation, the Commission may order relief under Section 8A-104. The list includes a cease-and-desist order, actual damages, hiring or reinstatement with or without back pay, and attorney fees and costs. It also includes a civil penalty per violation of up to $16,000, rising to $42,500 or $70,000 for respondents with prior adjudicated violations within set periods.

AI Video Interview Act (820 ILCS 42)

The Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act has applied since January 1, 2020. It covers an employer "that asks applicants to record video interviews and uses an artificial intelligence analysis of the applicant-submitted videos," when "considering applicants for positions based in Illinois."

Before asking for the video, the employer must:

• Notify the applicant that AI may be used to analyze the video.
• Explain "how the artificial intelligence works and what general types of characteristics it uses."
• Obtain the applicant's consent. An employer "may not use artificial intelligence to evaluate applicants who have not consented."

Sharing is limited to "persons whose expertise or technology is necessary." On an applicant's request, the employer must delete the video "within 30 days after receipt of the request," and tell others holding it to do the same, including for "all electronically generated backup copies."

Section 20, added by P.A. 102-47 and effective January 1, 2022, applies to an employer "that relies solely upon an artificial intelligence analysis of a video interview to determine whether an applicant will be selected for an in-person interview." That employer must collect race and ethnicity data and report it to the Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity annually by December 31.

The act has no penalty section. Sections 1, 5, 10, 15 and 20 contain no penalty and no Attorney General enforcement provision. An earlier version of this page gave a "$500 per day" figure, and that figure is not in the act.

Illinois SB 315: Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act

SB 315 is the Illinois frontier AI law. The General Assembly passed it in May 2026, 52-5-0 in the Senate and 110-0-0 in the House. The Governor approved it July 6, 2026, as P.A. 104-0538, and it takes effect January 1, 2027. We have not seen an ILCS cite for it yet.

As of November 4, 2026, by our count of enacted laws, three states have frontier-model safety statutes. California's is in force, and New York's and Illinois's start January 1, 2027. Illinois is the only one of the three that requires an annual third-party audit.

Who SB 315 Covers

The act uses two tiers, and the difference decides which duties apply.

• Frontier model: a foundation model "trained using a quantity of computing power greater than 10^26 integer or floating-point operations," counting the original training run and any "subsequent fine-tuning, reinforcement learning, or other material modifications the developer applies to a preceding foundation model."
• Frontier developer: a person who trains, or initiates the training of, a frontier model.
• Large frontier developer: a frontier developer that, "together with its affiliates, collectively had annual gross revenues in excess of $500,000,000 in the preceding calendar year."

The developer definition turns on training, and the computing count includes later fine-tuning and material modifications the developer applies to a preceding foundation model.

What SB 315 Requires, and When

The 72-hour duty is not limited to large developers, and it is not phased to 2028. It covers every frontier developer from January 1, 2027.

"Agency" means the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and Office of Homeland Security. The 24-hour disclosure does not go to that Agency by default; it goes to "an authority, including any law enforcement agency or public safety agency with jurisdiction, that is appropriate based on the nature of that incident and as required by law."

What Counts as a Critical Safety Incident

Section 5 lists four events:

• Unauthorized access to, modification of, or exfiltration of model weights "that results in death or bodily injury."
• Harm resulting from the materialization of a catastrophic risk.
• Loss of control of a frontier model causing death or bodily injury.
• A frontier model using deceptive techniques to subvert its developer's controls or monitoring, outside an evaluation designed to elicit that behavior, in a manner that demonstrates materially increased catastrophic risk.

"Catastrophic risk" means a foreseeable and material risk that a frontier model will materially contribute to the death of, or serious injury to, "more than 50 people or more than $1,000,000,000 in damage to, or loss of, property" from a single incident. The incident must involve the model giving expert-level help with a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapon, engaging without meaningful human oversight in a cyberattack or conduct that would be murder, assault, extortion or theft if done by a human, or evading the control of its developer or user. The definition excludes output information otherwise publicly accessible in a substantially similar form from a source other than a foundation model, lawful federal government activity, and harm from a model combined with other software if the model did not materially contribute to the harm.

The Third-Party Audit

The audit tests "compliance with the requirements of this Section," meaning Section 10, not the whole act. The auditor must have demonstrated competence, neither side may hold a financial interest in the other, and pay cannot depend on results.

The developer keeps an unredacted report "for as long as a frontier model is deployed plus 5 years." Within 30 days of receiving it, the developer publishes a high-level summary and a redacted copy, and sends the redacted copy to the Agency and the Attorney General.

SB 315 Penalties and Enforcement

Section 25(a) lists what triggers the civil penalty: failing to publish or transmit a compliant document, a false statement under Section 10(f), failing to have the audit done, failing to report a critical safety incident, or failing to comply with its own framework. The amount depends on severity. It "does not exceed $1,000,000 for the first violation," and for a subsequent violation it "may not exceed $3,000,000 per violation."

That section's subject is "A large frontier developer." So a smaller frontier developer owes the 72-hour report, but the Section 25 penalty for missing it names only large developers. The Attorney General brings these actions "exclusively," and "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to establish a private right of action associated with violations of this Act."

A separate remedy sits in another statute. Section 90 of SB 315 amends the Whistleblower Act from January 1, 2027, so an employer may not retaliate against an employee "for disclosing or threatening to disclose in good faith any violation of the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act." An employee may bring a civil action over that retaliation (740 ILCS 174/15(e), 174/30). Relief can include reinstatement, back pay, liquidated damages of up to $10,000 and a $10,000 civil penalty payable to the employee.

The Agency has a separate tool under Section 18(e). After notice and hearing, it may levy "a civil penalty of $1,000 for each day" a person fails to file a disclosure or correct false information, plus the assessments owed.

Other SB 315 Terms Worth Knowing

• Federal alternative (Section 17): the Agency is to designate qualifying federal laws or guidance. A developer that declares its intent to comply that way is deemed in compliance to the extent it meets the federal standard, and a failure to meet that standard is itself a violation.
• Other law (Section 30): the act's duties are cumulative with duties under other law, and they "do not limit any rights or remedies under existing law."
• Home rule (Section 35): regulating frontier models is "an exclusive power and function of the State," which denies home-rule units that power.
• Records (Section 15(f)): incident reports, internal-use assessments and unredacted audit reports held by the Agency or Attorney General are exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.

HB 1806: The Illinois AI Therapy Law

The Wellness and Oversight for Psychological Resources Act (HB 1806, P.A. 104-0054) was approved and took effect on August 1, 2025. Section 20(a) is the core rule:

"An individual, corporation, or entity may not provide, advertise, or otherwise offer therapy or psychotherapy services, including through the use of Internet-based artificial intelligence, to the public in this State unless the therapy or psychotherapy services are conducted by an individual who is a licensed professional."

Licensed professionals may use AI only within limits. Under Section 20(b), they may not allow AI to make independent therapeutic decisions, directly interact with clients in therapeutic communication, generate recommendations or treatment plans without their review and approval, or detect emotions or mental states.

Section 15 permits AI for administrative support, such as scheduling and billing, and supplementary support, such as records and anonymized data analysis, while the professional keeps full responsibility. If a session is recorded or transcribed, supplementary use requires written notice of the AI and its specific purpose, plus consent. Accepting general terms of use does not count as consent.

The act does not apply to religious counseling, peer support, or public self-help materials that do not purport to offer therapy. The Department of Financial and Professional Regulation enforces it, with civil penalties "not to exceed $10,000 per violation" after a hearing. The text states no private right of action.

HB 35, the AI Systems Use in Health Insurance Act, has not passed both chambers. Its last action was a re-referral to Senate Assignments on June 2, 2025.

Illinois Digital Replica Laws: HB 4762 and HB 4875

These are two different laws that are often run together. One governs contracts. The other governs distribution.

Digital Voice and Likeness Protection Act (HB 4762, P.A. 103-0830, 815 ILCS 550). In force since August 9, 2024. A contract term is unenforceable when it allows a digital replica "in place of work the individual would otherwise have performed in person," lacks "a reasonably specific description of the intended uses," and the person had neither qualifying legal counsel nor union representation.

HB 3178 (P.A. 104-0282), effective January 1, 2026, limited this rule. The rule now applies "only as it relates to a new performance, fixed on or after January 1, 2026." It is enacted law, not a pending bill. A missing description also does not void a term when the uses are consistent with the contract and "the fundamental character of the photography or sound track as recorded or performed."

Right of Publicity Act amendments (HB 4875, P.A. 103-0836, 765 ILCS 1075). Effective January 1, 2025. Section 30(b) provides that a person "may not knowingly distribute, transmit, or make available to the general public a sound recording or audiovisual work with actual knowledge that the work contains an unauthorized digital replica."

Liability also reaches one who "materially contributes to, induces, or otherwise facilitates" a violation after actual knowledge, with a safe harbor for pure transmitters and providers. Exceptions cover news, comment, criticism, scholarship, satire and parody, and documentary or biographical works unless they create a false impression that the replica is an authentic recording.

Illinois Deepfake and AI Note-Taker Rules

Illinois handles deepfakes through several statutes, covered in full on our Illinois deepfake laws page. HB 2123 (P.A. 103-0294), effective January 1, 2024, gives a civil claim over dissemination of a private or intentionally digitally altered sexual image without consent. HB 4623 (P.A. 103-0825), effective January 1, 2025, added an offense of obscene depiction of a purported child at 720 ILCS 5/11-20.4. HB 3851 (P.A. 104-0338) treats posting an unauthorized digital replica as cyber-bullying from the 2026-2027 school year where it creates the effects the bullying definition lists.

AI meeting assistants that record conversations raise a separate consent question under Illinois eavesdropping law. See our page on Illinois AI meeting recording laws.

AI in Illinois Schools and Colleges

HB 1859 (P.A. 104-0201), in force since January 1, 2026, adds 110 ILCS 805/3-29.28. It says a community college course "may not, in lieu of a faculty member, use artificial intelligence as the sole source of instruction for students." Faculty may still use AI to augment instruction.

SB 2909 (P.A. 104-0565) takes effect January 1, 2027. An evaluator may not use an AI tool to assign a numerical score or qualitative rating in a teacher's evaluation, or for any evaluation task requiring professional judgment. A teacher may not use AI to generate evidence of professional practice used in the evaluation. Both may use AI for administrative tasks, and each must disclose to the other the tool's name and specific purpose.

Illinois Chatbot Laws and the Attorney General

We found no enacted Illinois law aimed at companion chatbots or requiring general AI disclosure or labeling. The bills on those subjects are listed in the 2027 section below. SB 316 (AI companions) and SB 317 (customer service chat) each passed the Senate in May 2026 and stopped in the House.

The Children's Online Social Media Safety Act (HB 5511, P.A. 104-0664), approved July 31, 2026, is not a chatbot law. It sets age-assurance duties and protections for covered minors from January 1, 2028, and its text does not use the terms "artificial intelligence" or "chatbot."

Attorney General Kwame Raoul has acted under other authority. On October 14, 2026, he joined a coalition of 40 attorneys general in a notice filed in Character Technologies' bankruptcy, calling for child and consumer protections in any sale of Character.AI's business or assets. His office said several states, including Illinois, began investigating the company, and that the investigation identified potential consumer protection and privacy violations.

We found no reported enforcement action under an Illinois AI statute and no court challenge to HB 3773, SB 315 or HB 1806. That rests on web searches and the Attorney General's news listing, and an unreported action would not appear there.

Biometric Data and AI: BIPA (740 ILCS 14)

The Biometric Information Privacy Act is not an AI law, but it can apply where a tool collects biometrics. Section 15(b) bars a private entity from collecting a biometric identifier or biometric information unless it first gives written notice and receives a written release.

Illinois Executive Order 2026-07: AI Cabinet

Executive Order 2026-07, issued September 22, 2026, creates the Illinois Artificial Intelligence Cabinet, whose members serve as volunteers, with administrative support from the Department of Innovation and Technology. It directs study of AI data-center energy burden, procurement requirements and the adequacy of legal remedies.

It is a policy order, not a statute. "The AI Cabinet will sunset no later than December 31, 2027."

How Federal AI Policy Affects Illinois

As of November 4, 2026, we found no federal statute in the public laws of the 119th Congress that sets general rules for private AI systems or generally preempts state AI laws. In December 2025, Executive Order 14365 directed federal agencies to challenge or discourage state AI laws the administration views as conflicting with national policy, and called for a federal framework from Congress. The order itself does not declare any state law invalid.

For the orders themselves, see Trump's AI executive orders. For the cases, bills and agency steps, see our state AI law preemption tracker.

What Changes in Illinois AI Law in 2027

January 1, 2027 is the main date. Each item below is listed with its source.

No date is set for new IDHR rules. HB 3773 still directs the Department to adopt rules, so a new proposal could appear in the Illinois Register at any time.

Pending Illinois AI Bills

These bills were still pending on November 4, 2026, per ILGA status pages. None has passed both chambers. The General Assembly is a continuous body during the term for which House members are elected (Ill. Const., Art. IV, Sec. 5(a)), and ILGA status records show unfinished bills closed as "Session Sine Die" when a term ends, as on January 7, 2025. So any of these bills not passed by both chambers before the new General Assembly convenes on January 13, 2027 would need to be filed again.

More Illinois Laws

• Illinois Recording Laws
• Illinois Data Privacy Laws
• Illinois Background Check Laws
• Illinois Surveillance Camera Laws
• Illinois Sexting Laws
• Illinois Whistleblower Laws
• Illinois Deepfake Laws
• Illinois AI Meeting Recording Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Illinois have an AI law?

Yes, several, but none regulates AI in general. As of November 2026, the main ones are HB 3773 on employment, the AI Video Interview Act, HB 1806 on therapy, the digital replica laws, and SB 315 on frontier models, which takes effect January 1, 2027.

What is Illinois HB 3773?

HB 3773 amended the Illinois Human Rights Act, effective January 1, 2026. It makes it a civil rights violation for an employer to use AI that has the effect of subjecting employees to discrimination on the basis of protected classes, to use zip codes as a proxy for protected classes, or to fail to give an employee notice of AI use for covered employment purposes.

Is HB 3773 in effect?

Yes. It has been in force since January 1, 2026. We found no Department of Human Rights AI rule in force; its proposed rule was withdrawn by June 26, 2026, per the Flinn Report. The act's January 1, 2026 effective date does not depend on a rule.

Does Illinois require a bias audit for AI hiring tools?

HB 3773 contains no bias-audit requirement. It bars AI use with a discriminatory effect and requires notice. As of November 4, 2026, New York City is the only place we found with a bias-audit requirement, and that is a city law.

Do Illinois employers have to tell applicants they use AI?

HB 3773's notice duty names an employee. The definition of employee includes an applicant for any apprenticeship, but the statute does not say whether the duty reaches other job applicants. The AI Video Interview Act is separate: it requires notice, an explanation and consent from applicants before AI analyzes their video interviews for Illinois-based positions.

What is the penalty under the Illinois AI Video Interview Act?

The act has no penalty section and no Attorney General enforcement provision. It sets duties on notice, consent, sharing, deletion and demographic reporting.

When does Illinois SB 315 take effect?

January 1, 2027. The 72-hour incident report and the Section 18 disclosure statement start that day. The frontier AI framework starts January 1, 2028, and the annual audit starts on the later of that date or 90 days after a developer first qualifies as large.

Who has to comply with the Illinois AI Safety Measures Act?

Frontier developers, meaning those that train a foundation model using more than 10^26 integer or floating-point operations. Large frontier developers, with more than $500 million in annual gross revenues including affiliates, carry added duties.

What is the penalty under Illinois SB 315?

A large frontier developer faces a civil penalty of up to $1 million for a first violation and up to $3 million per later violation, in an action only the Attorney General can bring. The Agency may also levy $1,000 per day for disclosure failures. The act creates no private right of action for its own violations, but from January 1, 2027 the Whistleblower Act lets an employee sue over retaliation for disclosing a violation in good faith.

Is Illinois the first state to require AI audits?

As of November 4, 2026, by our count of enacted laws, Illinois is the only one of the three states with frontier-model safety statutes that requires an annual third-party audit. California's law is in force, and New York's and Illinois's start January 1, 2027.

Is AI therapy illegal in Illinois?

HB 1806 bars providing, advertising or offering therapy, including through Internet-based AI, to the public in Illinois unless a licensed professional conducts it. Licensed professionals may use AI for administrative and supplementary support within limits. Violations carry civil penalties up to $10,000 each.

Does Illinois have a chatbot law?

We found no enacted Illinois law aimed at companion chatbots. Bills including SB 316, SB 3262, SB 3368, HB 5044 and SB 317 had not passed both chambers as of November 4, 2026.

What is the Illinois digital replica law?

Two laws apply. The Digital Voice and Likeness Protection Act makes certain contract terms allowing a digital replica unenforceable. The Right of Publicity Act, as amended by HB 4875, bars knowingly distributing a work with actual knowledge that it contains an unauthorized digital replica.