Is it legal to use AI note takers in interviews? The four questions to answer

In most places it is legal to use an AI note taker in a job interview if everyone on the call knows and agrees and the tool only records, transcribes and summarizes. As of October 2026, the law asks four separate questions: whether every party consented to the capture (federal law and most states need one party, but California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Washington and others require all parties in many situations); whether the tool scores or judges the candidate, which brings AI hiring rules such as New York City's Local Law 144 and Illinois law into play; whether it collects biometrics such as voiceprints; and, for candidates in the EU, the GDPR and the EU AI Act.

This page answers each question from the statute or regulation itself, linked, and points to the deeper guide on this site rather than repeating it.

What are the four legal questions?

Question 1: did everyone on the call consent?

Federal law allows a person who is a party to a conversation, or who has one party's prior consent, to intercept it, unless it is done to commit a criminal or tortious act (18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d)). Many states are stricter. Examples of all-party rules, quoted from the statutes:

Several of these turn on the conversation being "confidential," "private" or recorded "secretly," which is why published lists disagree on how many all-party states there are. The full table, with the nuances, is in two-party consent states, and interviews where you and the candidate are in different states are covered in recording calls across state lines.

Does a transcription-only tool count?

Assume it does. Federal law defines "intercept" as "the aural or other acquisition of the contents" of a communication through a device (18 U.S.C. § 2510(4)), which a tool that turns speech into text does whether or not it keeps audio. Illinois' statute names transcription expressly for private electronic communications: it covers anyone who "intercepts, records, or transcribes," in a surreptitious manner, one to which they are not a party, without the consent of all parties. Washington's rule shows the practical answer: announce it, and make sure the announcement is captured too.

Does it matter whether a bot joins the call?

Consent attaches to capturing the conversation, not to whether a participant tile appears, so a bot-free tool needs the same consent line, said out loud, since the candidate sees nothing. A bot does add a separate question: whether the vendor operating it is itself a third party to the conversation. California's Penal Code § 631 reaches anyone who, without the consent of all parties, reads or attempts to learn the contents of a communication in transit, and anyone who aids, employs or conspires with them. Illinois' statute separately covers eavesdropping on a private conversation "to which he or she is not a party" without the consent of all parties (720 ILCS 5/14-2(a)(1)).

The practical step is the same whichever tool you use: name the tool in your consent line, say what it captures and who sees it, and wait for a clear yes. Wording for each situation is in the interview recording consent script.

Question 2: does the tool score or judge the candidate?

Recording law asks whether you may capture the interview. AI hiring rules ask what software does with it. Transcription and evaluation are treated differently.

• New York City, Local Law 144. Employers and employment agencies may not use an automated employment decision tool to screen candidates for jobs in the city without a bias audit within the past year, a public summary and notice to candidates (Admin. Code §§ 20-870 to 20-874; DCWP). The city's rules (6 RCNY § 5-300) say the targeted "simplified output" does not refer to output from tools that "transcribe a video or audio interview." Scores, classifications and recommendations are analyzed feature by feature in the Local Law 144 guide.
• Illinois, AI Video Interview Act. Applies to an employer that "asks applicants to record video interviews and uses an artificial intelligence analysis of the applicant-submitted videos" for positions based in Illinois: notice, an explanation of how the AI works, consent before the interview, sharing limits, and deletion within 30 days of a request (820 ILCS 42). Check the trigger against your process; see the Illinois AI Video Interview Act guide.
• Illinois, Human Rights Act. Since January 1, 2026, it is a civil rights violation for an employer to use artificial intelligence, defined to include generative AI, that has the effect of subjecting employees to discrimination in recruitment, hiring and other decisions, or to fail to give notice that it uses AI for those purposes (P.A. 103-0804, adding 775 ILCS 5/2-102(L)). Who counts and what notice is needed are covered in the HB 3773 guide.

Other states have their own rules with different triggers and dates; the AI hiring laws by state summary links each statute. The common thread is output that influences a hiring decision, so a note taker used only as a record sits differently from one whose scores decide who advances.

Question 3: does it collect biometrics?

Some tools recognize speakers by building voice profiles. Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act lists a "voiceprint" as a biometric identifier, and a private entity may not collect one unless it first informs the person in writing, states the purpose and length of term, and receives a written release (740 ILCS 14/10 and 14/15(b)). Maryland bars an employer from using a facial recognition service to create a facial template during an applicant's interview unless the applicant consents by signing a waiver (Lab. & Empl. § 3-717). Ask any vendor in writing whether it creates voiceprints or face templates; the AI note taker security questionnaire includes the question.

Question 4: what if the candidate is in the EU or UK?

Recording or transcribing an interview is processing personal data under the GDPR (Regulation (EU) 2016/679), which needs a lawful basis (Article 6) and information given to the candidate (Article 13); the UK position is covered in recording interviews under UK GDPR. On top of that, the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) lists AI intended to be used for recruitment or selection, including to evaluate candidates, as high-risk in Annex III, point 4(a). The Digital Omnibus on AI (Regulation (EU) 2026/1744) moved those Annex III obligations to 2 December 2027. Two parts already apply: Article 5(1)(f) prohibits AI that infers emotions in the workplace, except for medical or safety reasons, and Article 50(1) requires AI systems that interact directly with people to be designed so people are told. A tool that only transcribes is not named in Annex III; one that scores candidates may be high-risk. The EU AI Act guide covers provider and deployer duties.

What should you do before using an AI note taker in interviews?

1. Know what the tool does. Record, transcribe, summarize, score, rank, recognize voices, analyze faces. Get it in writing.
2. Ask for consent every time, before capture starts, and wait for a clear yes. Use the strict script when anyone may be in an all-party state.
3. Be able to stop in one action, and take notes by hand if the candidate declines, with no effect on the assessment.
4. Keep evaluation with people. If the tool scores, decide how much weight the score carries and write it down; see how to score interviews consistently.
5. Give the notices the AI rules require where you hire; the AI disclosure templates map wording to each law.
6. Know where the data goes and how long it stays; see where AI note takers store interview data and how long to keep interview notes.
7. Check your employer's and clients' policies, which can be stricter than the law.

Primary sources used on this page