Research Library
Working papers on AI hiring law in New York, the United Kingdom, and Texas.
New York
- NYC Local Law 144 in 2026: What the Comptroller Audit Changed for Employers
A December 2025 State Comptroller audit found NYC's enforcement of Local Law 144 ineffective. DCWP has committed to proactive enforcement. What that means for employers using AEDTs in 2026.
- What Counts as an AEDT? Scoping Local Law 144 Across Your Hiring Stack
Most NYC employers underestimate how many of their hiring tools are automated employment decision tools. A practical guide to the AEDT definition and where scope hides.
- Who Can Run Your Bias Audit? The Independent Auditor Requirement Under Local Law 144
Local Law 144 requires an independent bias auditor, but NYC maintains no approved list. What independence means, who fails the test, and how to document your selection.
- Candidate Notice Under Local Law 144: What It Actually Requires, and What It Doesn't
The 10-business-day notice must tell candidates an AEDT will be used and how to request an alternative process. It does not require you to provide one. What the notice must contain, and the misconception that keeps tripping employers up.
- How Local Law 144 Penalties Actually Compound: The Per-Day Math
Local Law 144 penalties look small on paper, $500 to $1,500 per violation. The counting method is what makes them add up. A worked look at how a single uncorrected gap becomes a large number fast.
- What a 2026 DCWP Review Actually Checks
DCWP committed to using its Enforcement Workbook and consulting the Office of Technology and Innovation after the Comptroller's audit criticized its review process. What a more rigorous 2026 review actually looks for.
- Building One Hiring Funnel That Satisfies Local Law 144 Without Geo-Fencing
Geo-fencing New York candidates out of a single hiring funnel rarely works in practice. A practical design for one compliant process that satisfies Local Law 144 regardless of where applicants apply from.
London and the UK
- The DUAA and AI Hiring: What Changed for UK Employers on 5 February 2026
The Data (Use and Access) Act replaced the UK GDPR Article 22 near-ban on automated decisions with a permission-plus-safeguards regime. What London employers using AI screening now have to do.
- What Counts as Meaningful Human Involvement in UK Recruitment?
The ICO says a reviewer who only confirms the model's output is not meaningful human involvement. What the standard requires, why most recruitment processes fail it, and how to redesign review.
- The ICO's 2026 Recruitment Report: What London Employers Should Take From It
The ICO's March 2026 report on automated decision-making in recruitment drew on evidence from over 30 employers. Its central finding was that most did not know they were doing ADM.
Austin and Texas
- TRAIGA and Texas Employers: What the Law Requires, and What It Does Not
The Texas Responsible AI Governance Act took effect 1 January 2026 but spared employers most obligations. What TRAIGA actually requires of Austin employers using AI in hiring, and where the real exposure sits.
- Austin Employers, Remote Roles, and Out-of-State AI Hiring Law
Texas law asks little of employers using AI in hiring. New York City, the EU, and several other states ask a great deal, and they apply based on where your candidate sits. What Austin companies posting remote roles need to know.