Is weight discrimination in hiring illegal? Height and weight laws in 2026

Weight and height are not protected under federal anti-discrimination law, but rejecting a candidate because of either is illegal in Michigan, which has banned it since 1977, and in New York City, which added both on November 26, 2023; San Francisco and Washington, D.C. have their own protections. Everywhere else, three federal routes still apply: the ADA when weight is, or is treated as, a disability; Title VII when a height or weight minimum screens out women; and the ADA's rule that physical standards must be tied to the job. As of October 2026, New Jersey's Senate has passed a height and weight bill that is waiting in the Assembly.

This page sets out which laws apply, what they allow, and how to write physical requirements into ads, assessments and interviews so they test the work rather than the body. For the medical-exam side, see pre-employment medical exams under the ADA.

Where are height and weight protected in hiring?

Other cities have their own ordinances, so check the local code wherever a role is based. Federal anti-discrimination law and most state laws do not list height or weight at all, which is why the ADA and Title VII routes below matter for employers outside these places.

What does Michigan's law require?

Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act is the broadest state rule. An employer may not "fail or refuse to hire or recruit, discharge, or otherwise discriminate against an individual" because of a list of traits that includes "height, weight" (MCL 37.2202(1)(a)), and "employer" means "a person that has 1 or more employees" (MCL 37.2201(a)). Two further rules reach the recruiting process itself (MCL 37.2206):

• Ads and notices. No statement, advertisement or notice "that indicates a preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination" based on height or weight.
• Questions and forms. Except as permitted by commission rules or federal law, no "written or oral inquiry or form of application that elicits or attempts to elicit information concerning" an applicant's height or weight, and no record of it.

The defense is narrow. An employer may treat height or weight as a bona fide occupational qualification without asking the commission first, but then "shall have the burden of establishing that the qualification is reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the business" (MCL 37.2208). Our page on the bona fide occupational qualification explains how courts read that phrase.

What does New York City's law require?

Local Law 61 of 2023 added height and weight to the New York City Human Rights Law, effective November 26, 2023. The Commission on Human Rights says the law "prohibits unlawful discrimination based on height or weight in employment, housing, and public accommodations," and lists the employment exceptions: where consideration of height or weight is "required by federal, state, or local law or regulation"; where a person's height or weight "prevents them from performing core job functions and no alternative action would allow" them to do the job; and where "height or weight criteria are reasonably necessary for the execution of the normal operations of the employer" (NYC Commission on Human Rights).

In practice that means a recruiter in New York City should not screen on body size at all, and a hiring manager who believes a role needs a physical capacity should describe the capacity and test it the same way for everyone, as the section on job requirements below sets out.

When is weight a disability under the ADA?

The ADA's regulations start from a default: the definition of impairment "does not include physical characteristics such as eye color, hair color, left-handedness, or height, weight, or muscle tone that are within 'normal' range and are not the result of a physiological disorder" (29 CFR part 1630, appendix, on section 1630.2(h)). Courts read that sentence differently:

• Federal appeals courts: In Morriss v. BNSF Railway Co., 817 F.3d 1104 (8th Cir. 2016), a railroad declined to hire an applicant for a safety-sensitive job under a policy against hiring anyone with a body mass index of 40 or more. The court held that weight "qualifies as a physical impairment only if it falls outside the normal range and it occurs as the result of a physiological disorder," and that the ADA does not prohibit acting on "an unacceptable risk of a future physical impairment."
• Washington State: In Taylor v. Burlington Northern Railroad Holdings, 193 Wn.2d 611 (2019), the state supreme court held that "obesity is always an impairment" under the Washington Law Against Discrimination, without any separate underlying disorder.

So a BMI cutoff that might survive a federal ADA claim in one circuit can be disability discrimination under state law in Washington. And where a candidate does have a disability, any qualification standard or test that screens them out must be "job related for the position in question and is consistent with business necessity" (29 CFR 1630.10(a)). For accommodations during the interview itself, see ADA accommodations in interviews.

Can a height or weight minimum be sex discrimination?

Yes. In Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977), Alabama required prison guards to be at least 5 feet 2 inches tall and weigh at least 120 pounds. Combined, those standards "would exclude 41.13% of the female population while excluding less than 1% of the male population." The state said the rules stood for strength. The Supreme Court answered that if strength is the real need, the employer's "purpose could be achieved by adopting and validating a test for applicants that measures strength directly," and upheld the finding that the minimums violated Title VII.

The lesson outlasts the case: a body measurement used as a stand-in for a capacity is the weakest kind of requirement. Test the capacity. Our page on Title VII disparate impact covers how that theory works today, including the EEOC's 2026 enforcement priorities.

How should physical requirements appear in job ads and assessments?

Tie every physical requirement to an essential function, and write the function down before you advertise. The ADA rules list "written job descriptions prepared before advertising or interviewing applicants for the job" as evidence of which functions are essential (29 CFR 1630.2(n)(3)(ii)).

Then assess the task, not the person's size: the same lifting or carrying test for every candidate at the same stage, scored the same way. If a test measures physical or mental health rather than a work task, it may be a medical exam with its own timing rules; see pre-employment medical exams. For the other words that can turn an ad unlawful, see discriminatory job ad language, and for writing ads that screen on real requirements, see how to write a job description that screens.

What should interviewers avoid saying or writing?

• Do not ask height or weight. In Michigan the question itself is unlawful; elsewhere it creates a record with no job-related use. Ask instead: "The role requires [task]. Can you do that, with or without accommodation?" Our illegal interview questions table has more alternatives.
• Do not comment on body size, fitness or "image" in notes, messages or debriefs. Those words become evidence of motive. See what not to write in interview notes.
• Do not assume a candidate cannot do a physical task because of how they look. Describe the task and let the candidate answer.
• Agencies: a client request for a candidate of a certain size or "look" is a request you cannot pass on in Michigan, New York City and the other places above, and in any state it is a weak basis for a referral decision.

A short checklist

• Physical requirements written as tasks, tied to essential functions, documented before the ad goes out.
• No height, weight, BMI or "build" language in ads, intake notes or application forms.
• One physical test per role, given to everyone at the same stage, validated against the task.
• Equipment or legal limits cited by source where they are the real reason for a requirement.
• Michigan, New York City, San Francisco and D.C. roles checked against the local rule; New Jersey's bill watched.
• Interview notes limited to job-related evidence, with no body or appearance comments.