Pre-employment assessments and background checks are generally legal in the United States, subject to conditions that differ by statute. Where a third party produces the report, the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires a written disclosure in a document consisting solely of that disclosure, the applicant's written authorization, and a pre-adverse action notice enclosing the report and a description of the applicant's rights before any decision is final [1]. Under Title VII and the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, a selection rate below four-fifths of the highest group's rate is generally regarded as evidence of adverse impact, which puts the employer to a showing of job relatedness and business necessity [5][6]. The ADA bars medical examinations and disability-related questions before a conditional job offer while permitting questions about the ability to perform job-related functions [10][11]. State fair-chance, salary history, credit report, and automated hiring tool laws add requirements and change often [12][13][14][15]. This is general information rather than legal advice.
\n","summary":"Screening is lawful in principle and regulated in the details. Third-party background reports trigger FCRA disclosure, authorization, and a two-step adverse action sequence. Tests and criminal-record screens face Title VII adverse impact analysis under the Uniform Guidelines. The ADA restricts what you may ask or examine before a conditional offer. Fair-chance, salary history, credit, and automated hiring tool rules vary by state and city. A June 2026 federal opinion narrowed enforcement posture on disparate impact without repealing the statute.","publishedAt":"2026-07-21T21:20:37.515","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","editorialStatus":"APPROVED","lastReviewedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","nextReviewDueAt":"2026-10-21T00:00:00","templateVersion":"v2","aliases":["Are pre-employment assessments legal?","Are employment background checks legal?","Is it legal to require a personality test to get a job?","What laws apply to pre-employment testing?","FCRA requirements for employment background checks","EEOC rules on employment tests and selection procedures","Does the ADA allow pre-employment medical exams?","What is disparate impact in hiring?","Is the four-fifths rule actually a law?","Ban the box and fair chance hiring laws","Are AI hiring assessments legal?","Pre-adverse action notice requirements"],"confidenceScore":86,"confidenceLabel":"High","canonicalUrl":null},"contributor":{"id":"ec39deab-44fe-48d8-9029-fefe993ab85a","slug":"answer-stack","displayName":"AnswerStack","websiteUrl":null},"contributorOrganizationProfile":{"entityId":"ec39deab-44fe-48d8-9029-fefe993ab85a","legalName":null,"description":null,"websiteUrl":null,"imageUrl":null,"slogan":null,"subtitle":null,"facts":[],"coiNote":null,"foundingDate":null,"numberOfEmployeesText":null,"contactPoint":null,"address":null,"headquartersText":null,"organizationType":null},"contributorPerson":{"slug":"answerstack-editorial-team","displayName":"AnswerStack Editorial Team"},"sections":[{"id":"827686f4-88b7-428c-b42d-26cdbd7470bf","sectionKey":"is_screening_legal","sectionType":"markdown_section","heading":"Are pre-employment assessments and background checks legal?","introMarkdown":"Both are lawful in the United States as a general practice, with conditions that attach at specific points rather than to screening as a whole. What matters is whether the particular procedure, the particular question, and the paperwork around it satisfy whichever statute reaches that step.\n\nFour federal frameworks do most of the work. The Fair Credit Reporting Act governs the mechanics whenever a third party compiles a report about an applicant for you, and its disclosure, authorization, and adverse action steps apply whether or not the underlying information is accurate [1][2]. Title VII, through the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures at 29 CFR part 1607, governs the substance of any procedure used as a basis for an employment decision, which the EEOC treats as covering interviews, application review, work samples, and physical requirements, not formal tests alone [6]. The Americans with Disabilities Act governs what you may ask and examine, drawing its main line at the conditional job offer [10][11]. State and local law then adds a layer that federal law does not displace [12][13][14][15][16].\n\nThose frameworks run independently: a criminal-record screen can satisfy every FCRA notice requirement and still create Title VII exposure if it excludes applicants without regard to the offense, the time elapsed, or the job [7]. Everything below describes published requirements as of July 2026 and is general information rather than legal advice.","introHtml":"Both are lawful in the United States as a general practice, with conditions that attach at specific points rather than to screening as a whole. What matters is whether the particular procedure, the particular question, and the paperwork around it satisfy whichever statute reaches that step.
\nFour federal frameworks do most of the work. The Fair Credit Reporting Act governs the mechanics whenever a third party compiles a report about an applicant for you, and its disclosure, authorization, and adverse action steps apply whether or not the underlying information is accurate [1][2]. Title VII, through the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures at 29 CFR part 1607, governs the substance of any procedure used as a basis for an employment decision, which the EEOC treats as covering interviews, application review, work samples, and physical requirements, not formal tests alone [6]. The Americans with Disabilities Act governs what you may ask and examine, drawing its main line at the conditional job offer [10][11]. State and local law then adds a layer that federal law does not displace [12][13][14][15][16].
\nThose frameworks run independently: a criminal-record screen can satisfy every FCRA notice requirement and still create Title VII exposure if it excludes applicants without regard to the offense, the time elapsed, or the job [7]. Everything below describes published requirements as of July 2026 and is general information rather than legal advice.
\n","outroMarkdown":null,"outroHtml":null,"contentJson":{},"configJson":{},"noteMarkdown":null,"noteHtml":null,"sortOrder":10},{"id":"7ba7ccf6-ac81-477b-b4c7-6ee1b2238e99","sectionKey":"regime_map","sectionType":"table_section","heading":"Which law reaches which part of screening?","introMarkdown":"Each screening step answers to a different statute, and the requirements do not overlap neatly.","introHtml":"Each screening step answers to a different statute, and the requirements do not overlap neatly.
\n","outroMarkdown":null,"outroHtml":null,"contentJson":{"rows":[{"cells":["FCRA, 15 USC 1681b(b)","Reports from a third-party screening agency","Standalone disclosure, written authorization, pre-adverse action notice with the report, then a final adverse action notice [1][2]","Employers using a screening vendor [1]"]},{"cells":["Title VII, 29 CFR part 1607","Any procedure used as a basis for an employment decision [6]","Validity and job relatedness once adverse impact appears, plus selection-rate records [4][5]","Employers covered by Title VII, including vendor tools"]},{"cells":["ADA, 42 USC 12112(d)","Medical exams, disability questions, test format","No medical exam or disability inquiry before a conditional offer; accessible administration [10][11]","ADA-covered employers, from application on"]},{"cells":["State fair-chance laws","When you may act on criminal history","Timing limits, individualized assessment, notice beyond FCRA [7][12]","37 states, 150-plus localities; 15 reach private employers [12]"]},{"cells":["State salary history bans","Asking about or relying on prior pay","Ban on the inquiry, often with a pay-range duty [13]","22 statewide, 24 local bans, April 2026 [13]"]},{"cells":["State credit report limits","Employment use of credit reports","Ban except for enumerated positions [14]","States with such statutes, e.g. California [14]"]},{"cells":["Automated decision tool rules","Algorithmic scoring, video analysis, game-based tests","Bias audit, posted results, candidate notice (NYC); four-year retention (CA) [15][16]","Jurisdiction specific [16]"]}],"columns":["Legal regime","What it reaches","Core requirement","Applies to"]},"configJson":{},"noteMarkdown":null,"noteHtml":null,"sortOrder":20},{"id":"b002aaad-8384-4848-bedf-94825b2ad760","sectionKey":"fcra_steps","sectionType":"markdown_section","heading":"What does the FCRA require when a third party runs the background check?","introMarkdown":"The Fair Credit Reporting Act applies whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares the report, which covers essentially every commercial screening vendor. Before you obtain it, 15 USC 1681b(b)(2) requires a clear and conspicuous written notice that a consumer report may be obtained for employment purposes, in a document that consists solely of that disclosure, together with the applicant's written authorization [1]. You also certify to the vendor that you will follow the pre-adverse action rules and will not use the information in violation of equal employment opportunity law [1].\n\n### The two-step adverse action sequence\n\nSection 1681b(b)(3) requires that before you take any adverse action based in whole or in part on the report, you give the applicant a copy of the report and a written description of their rights under the statute [1]. The statute names no waiting period, so practice settled on a defined window for the applicant to respond, with five business days a common floor in employer-side guidance [3].\n\nAfter that window, the final notice under 15 USC 1681m(a) must state the action taken, give the agency's contact details, state that the agency did not make the decision and cannot give the specific reasons, and describe the right to a free copy of the report within 60 days and to dispute its accuracy [2][3]. None of this applies if you never obtain a third-party report; a search you run yourself sits outside the FCRA but inside Title VII, the ADA, and state law.","introHtml":"The Fair Credit Reporting Act applies whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares the report, which covers essentially every commercial screening vendor. Before you obtain it, 15 USC 1681b(b)(2) requires a clear and conspicuous written notice that a consumer report may be obtained for employment purposes, in a document that consists solely of that disclosure, together with the applicant's written authorization [1]. You also certify to the vendor that you will follow the pre-adverse action rules and will not use the information in violation of equal employment opportunity law [1].
\nSection 1681b(b)(3) requires that before you take any adverse action based in whole or in part on the report, you give the applicant a copy of the report and a written description of their rights under the statute [1]. The statute names no waiting period, so practice settled on a defined window for the applicant to respond, with five business days a common floor in employer-side guidance [3].
\nAfter that window, the final notice under 15 USC 1681m(a) must state the action taken, give the agency's contact details, state that the agency did not make the decision and cannot give the specific reasons, and describe the right to a free copy of the report within 60 days and to dispute its accuracy [2][3]. None of this applies if you never obtain a third-party report; a search you run yourself sits outside the FCRA but inside Title VII, the ADA, and state law.
\n","outroMarkdown":null,"outroHtml":null,"contentJson":{},"configJson":{},"noteMarkdown":null,"noteHtml":null,"sortOrder":30},{"id":"b27c6af9-8450-4fcf-8818-d1f18c411404","sectionKey":"title_vii_impact","sectionType":"markdown_section","heading":"What does Title VII require of a test or a criminal-record screen?","introMarkdown":"Title VII reaches the substance of a selection procedure through the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, adopted in 1978 and codified at 29 CFR part 1607, which provide that use of any procedure with an adverse impact on the employment opportunities of a race, sex, or ethnic group is discriminatory unless the procedure has been validated in accordance with the Guidelines [4][6].\n\n### How the four-fifths rule works\n\nThe threshold is a rule of thumb rather than a definition of illegality. A selection rate for any race, sex, or ethnic group that is less than four-fifths, or eighty percent, of the rate for the highest group is generally regarded by the federal enforcement agencies as evidence of adverse impact [5]. Smaller differences may still count where they are statistically significant, and larger ones may not on small samples [5]. Once adverse impact appears, the burden is to show the procedure is job related and consistent with business necessity, which the EEOC describes as necessary to the safe and efficient performance of the job, and where two procedures are substantially equally valid the Guidelines direct you to the one with the lesser adverse impact [4][6].\n\n### Criminal records specifically\n\nThe EEOC's April 2012 enforcement guidance separates arrests from convictions. An arrest does not establish that criminal conduct occurred, so it alone cannot justify exclusion, though the underlying conduct may be examined where relevant to the job [7]. For convictions the guidance applies the Green factors: the nature and gravity of the offense, the time passed since it or the sentence ended, and the nature of the job sought [7]. Blanket exclusions covering every conviction across every position are the pattern most exposed under that guidance [7].\n\n### What changed in federal enforcement during 2026\n\nThe Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion on June 9, 2026 concluding that the EEOC's Title VII disparate-impact guidelines are inconsistent with Title VII and the Constitution, because they impose liability for disproportionate effects without regard to an employer's likely intent; the opinion also treats facially neutral tools such as background checks and aptitude tests as presumptively job related [8][9].\n\nThat is a shift in enforcement posture, not a repeal. The Uniform Guidelines remain in the Code of Federal Regulations, the 2012 guidance remains posted without a rescission banner [7], and disparate-impact claims remain available to private litigants and under many state statutes [8]. Confirm the current federal position with counsel before changing a program built on the four-fifths analysis.","introHtml":"Title VII reaches the substance of a selection procedure through the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, adopted in 1978 and codified at 29 CFR part 1607, which provide that use of any procedure with an adverse impact on the employment opportunities of a race, sex, or ethnic group is discriminatory unless the procedure has been validated in accordance with the Guidelines [4][6].
\nThe threshold is a rule of thumb rather than a definition of illegality. A selection rate for any race, sex, or ethnic group that is less than four-fifths, or eighty percent, of the rate for the highest group is generally regarded by the federal enforcement agencies as evidence of adverse impact [5]. Smaller differences may still count where they are statistically significant, and larger ones may not on small samples [5]. Once adverse impact appears, the burden is to show the procedure is job related and consistent with business necessity, which the EEOC describes as necessary to the safe and efficient performance of the job, and where two procedures are substantially equally valid the Guidelines direct you to the one with the lesser adverse impact [4][6].
\nThe EEOC's April 2012 enforcement guidance separates arrests from convictions. An arrest does not establish that criminal conduct occurred, so it alone cannot justify exclusion, though the underlying conduct may be examined where relevant to the job [7]. For convictions the guidance applies the Green factors: the nature and gravity of the offense, the time passed since it or the sentence ended, and the nature of the job sought [7]. Blanket exclusions covering every conviction across every position are the pattern most exposed under that guidance [7].
\nThe Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion on June 9, 2026 concluding that the EEOC's Title VII disparate-impact guidelines are inconsistent with Title VII and the Constitution, because they impose liability for disproportionate effects without regard to an employer's likely intent; the opinion also treats facially neutral tools such as background checks and aptitude tests as presumptively job related [8][9].
\nThat is a shift in enforcement posture, not a repeal. The Uniform Guidelines remain in the Code of Federal Regulations, the 2012 guidance remains posted without a rescission banner [7], and disparate-impact claims remain available to private litigants and under many state statutes [8]. Confirm the current federal position with counsel before changing a program built on the four-fifths analysis.
\n","outroMarkdown":null,"outroHtml":null,"contentJson":{},"configJson":{},"noteMarkdown":null,"noteHtml":null,"sortOrder":40},{"id":"65be6406-4d2c-4257-aca6-a073d7a3778d","sectionKey":"ada_limits","sectionType":"markdown_section","heading":"What does the ADA allow you to ask or test before a job offer?","introMarkdown":"The ADA prohibits a covered employer from conducting a medical examination or asking a job applicant whether they have a disability or about its nature or severity, while permitting inquiries into the ability to perform job-related functions [10]. The dividing line is the conditional job offer: those questions and examinations are off limits before it and permitted afterward subject to conditions [11].\n\n### When a test counts as a medical examination\n\nThe EEOC defines a medical examination as a procedure or test that seeks information about a person's physical or mental impairments or health, weighing factors such as whether a health professional administers it, whether it is designed to reveal an impairment, and whether it measures physiological responses rather than task performance [11]. A physical agility or fitness test is not a medical examination where it measures actual job tasks, and becomes one once you measure the applicant's physiological response [11]. A psychological test is a medical examination where it provides evidence that would lead to identifying a mental disorder, and is not one where it is designed solely to measure honesty, tastes, and habits [11]. Tests for current illegal use of controlled substances are not medical examinations under the ADA [11]. Personality inventories and game-based assessments sit close to that line, and California's automated-decision system regulations treat an assessment that elicits information about a disability as a potential unlawful medical inquiry [15].\n\n### Accommodation and the post-offer exam\n\nEmployment tests must be administered so results reflect the skill being measured rather than an impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skill, unless the test is designed to measure that skill, which in practice means alternate formats or extended time on request [10]. After a conditional offer you may require a medical examination, provided all entering employees in the job category are examined regardless of disability and the records are kept confidential and separate [10]. Screening someone out for a disability then requires showing the reason is job related and consistent with business necessity, or that the person poses a direct threat [11].","introHtml":"The ADA prohibits a covered employer from conducting a medical examination or asking a job applicant whether they have a disability or about its nature or severity, while permitting inquiries into the ability to perform job-related functions [10]. The dividing line is the conditional job offer: those questions and examinations are off limits before it and permitted afterward subject to conditions [11].
\nThe EEOC defines a medical examination as a procedure or test that seeks information about a person's physical or mental impairments or health, weighing factors such as whether a health professional administers it, whether it is designed to reveal an impairment, and whether it measures physiological responses rather than task performance [11]. A physical agility or fitness test is not a medical examination where it measures actual job tasks, and becomes one once you measure the applicant's physiological response [11]. A psychological test is a medical examination where it provides evidence that would lead to identifying a mental disorder, and is not one where it is designed solely to measure honesty, tastes, and habits [11]. Tests for current illegal use of controlled substances are not medical examinations under the ADA [11]. Personality inventories and game-based assessments sit close to that line, and California's automated-decision system regulations treat an assessment that elicits information about a disability as a potential unlawful medical inquiry [15].
\nEmployment tests must be administered so results reflect the skill being measured rather than an impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skill, unless the test is designed to measure that skill, which in practice means alternate formats or extended time on request [10]. After a conditional offer you may require a medical examination, provided all entering employees in the job category are examined regardless of disability and the records are kept confidential and separate [10]. Screening someone out for a disability then requires showing the reason is job related and consistent with business necessity, or that the person poses a direct threat [11].
\n","outroMarkdown":null,"outroHtml":null,"contentJson":{},"configJson":{},"noteMarkdown":null,"noteHtml":null,"sortOrder":50},{"id":"9c14cd69-02c9-4215-a9d5-30153d3cb2ed","sectionKey":"state_local_rules","sectionType":"markdown_section","heading":"Which state and local rules add requirements on top?","introMarkdown":"State and local law carries most of the operational detail and changes fastest. Federal rules set a floor, and a jurisdiction can require more.\n\n### Fair-chance and ban-the-box laws\n\nThese control when in the process you may ask about or act on criminal history. NELP's tracker records 37 states and more than 150 cities and counties with ban-the-box or fair-chance policies, 15 of those states reaching private employers [12]. These add their own individualized assessment and notice steps on top of the FCRA sequence.\n\n### Salary history bans\n\nTwenty-two statewide and twenty-four local bans were recorded on an April 2026 tracker update [13]. Most prohibit asking about prior compensation and relying on it to set pay, and several pair the ban with a duty to give a pay range.\n\n### Limits on credit checks\n\nSome states restrict employment credit reports to enumerated positions. California Labor Code section 1024.5 allows one only for managerial and law enforcement roles, jobs where the report is required by law, jobs with regular access to specified personal financial data or to $10,000 or more in cash, and jobs with signature authority over money or contracts [14].\n\n### Automated decision tool rules\n\nNew York City's Local Law 144 requires an employer using an automated employment decision tool to have a bias audit conducted no more than one year before use, publish a summary of the results on its website, and notify candidates that the tool will be used and what data is collected, with civil penalties between $500 and $1,500 per day [16]. California's automated-decision system regulations took effect on October 1, 2025, require four-year retention of records including scoring outputs and audit findings, and make the results of bias testing relevant in a discrimination case [15].\n\nCounts and effective dates here move every legislative session, so confirm the position in each state and city where you hire.","introHtml":"State and local law carries most of the operational detail and changes fastest. Federal rules set a floor, and a jurisdiction can require more.
\nThese control when in the process you may ask about or act on criminal history. NELP's tracker records 37 states and more than 150 cities and counties with ban-the-box or fair-chance policies, 15 of those states reaching private employers [12]. These add their own individualized assessment and notice steps on top of the FCRA sequence.
\nTwenty-two statewide and twenty-four local bans were recorded on an April 2026 tracker update [13]. Most prohibit asking about prior compensation and relying on it to set pay, and several pair the ban with a duty to give a pay range.
\nSome states restrict employment credit reports to enumerated positions. California Labor Code section 1024.5 allows one only for managerial and law enforcement roles, jobs where the report is required by law, jobs with regular access to specified personal financial data or to $10,000 or more in cash, and jobs with signature authority over money or contracts [14].
\nNew York City's Local Law 144 requires an employer using an automated employment decision tool to have a bias audit conducted no more than one year before use, publish a summary of the results on its website, and notify candidates that the tool will be used and what data is collected, with civil penalties between $500 and $1,500 per day [16]. California's automated-decision system regulations took effect on October 1, 2025, require four-year retention of records including scoring outputs and audit findings, and make the results of bias testing relevant in a discrimination case [15].
\nCounts and effective dates here move every legislative session, so confirm the position in each state and city where you hire.
\n","outroMarkdown":null,"outroHtml":null,"contentJson":{},"configJson":{},"noteMarkdown":null,"noteHtml":null,"sortOrder":60},{"id":"a16f8be3-2561-4dde-a37d-abb955877faf","sectionKey":"practical_steps","sectionType":"markdown_section","heading":"What does a defensible screening process look like in practice?","introMarkdown":"These organizational practices cover the federal requirements above and the records that support them; they are not a legal opinion.\n\n1. Put the FCRA disclosure on its own page with nothing else on it, keeping waivers and state notices elsewhere [1].\n2. Write down the job-related reason for every screen before you run it, tied to duties in the job description [4][6].\n3. Record selection rates by sex and by race and ethnic group from the day a procedure goes live [5].\n4. Ask each vendor in writing for the validation report behind any cutoff score, since responsibility for the procedure stays with you [4][6].\n5. Publish an accommodation route in the application flow and honor requests for alternate formats or extended time [10].\n6. Hold disability-related questions and medical examinations until after a conditional offer, applying any post-offer exam to all entering employees in the category [10][11].\n7. Build the two-step adverse action sequence into your applicant tracking system with a defined waiting window and stored copies of both notices [1][2][3].\n8. Keep a jurisdiction matrix covering fair-chance timing, salary history, credit limits, and automated tool obligations wherever you hire [12][13][14][15][16].","introHtml":"These organizational practices cover the federal requirements above and the records that support them; they are not a legal opinion.
\nThis record describes published statutes, regulations, and agency guidance as of July 2026. Screening exposure depends on the job, the procedure, the applicant pool, and the jurisdictions involved, and the state counts cited above are accurate only on the day they are checked [12][13].
\nThe June 2026 opinion changed how federal disparate-impact liability is likely to be enforced. Title VII, the Uniform Guidelines, private disparate-impact claims, and state anti-discrimination statutes all remain in place [8][9].
\nReport scope and turnaround time are separate questions from whether the program is lawful. FCRA timing here concerns notice obligations, not vendor processing speed [1][2].
\n","outroMarkdown":null,"outroHtml":null,"contentJson":{},"configJson":{},"noteMarkdown":null,"noteHtml":null,"sortOrder":80},{"id":"257250d5-9c88-4783-93e6-c000009e0b53","sectionKey":"contributor_perspective","sectionType":"markdown_section","heading":"How this answer was researched","introMarkdown":"This record was assembled from primary legal sources read directly: the statutory text of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Uniform Guidelines at 29 CFR part 1607, and the EEOC's posted guidance on employment tests, arrest and conviction records, and preemployment medical inquiries. State and local material came from the governing text where one was reachable, and from dated trackers where the position changes too often for a static citation to hold. The June 2026 Office of Legal Counsel opinion was confirmed against two independent employment-law analyses rather than asserted from memory, since federal disparate-impact enforcement is in motion.\n\nNothing here is legal advice, and screening obligations turn on facts and jurisdiction. If you practice employment law, run a screening program, or build assessment software and can correct a detail or supply a more current citation, contributions are welcome.","introHtml":"This record was assembled from primary legal sources read directly: the statutory text of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Uniform Guidelines at 29 CFR part 1607, and the EEOC's posted guidance on employment tests, arrest and conviction records, and preemployment medical inquiries. State and local material came from the governing text where one was reachable, and from dated trackers where the position changes too often for a static citation to hold. The June 2026 Office of Legal Counsel opinion was confirmed against two independent employment-law analyses rather than asserted from memory, since federal disparate-impact enforcement is in motion.
\nNothing here is legal advice, and screening obligations turn on facts and jurisdiction. If you practice employment law, run a screening program, or build assessment software and can correct a detail or supply a more current citation, contributions are welcome.
\n","outroMarkdown":null,"outroHtml":null,"contentJson":{},"configJson":{},"noteMarkdown":"This answer was written and reviewed by the AnswerStack Editorial Team, which has no commercial stake in the products, companies, or methods discussed. Every claim is cited inline and verified on the dates shown.","noteHtml":"This answer was written and reviewed by the AnswerStack Editorial Team, which has no commercial stake in the products, companies, or methods discussed. Every claim is cited inline and verified on the dates shown.
\n","sortOrder":90}],"citations":[{"title":"15 U.S. Code 1681b: Permissible purposes of consumer reports","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681b","excerpt":"a document that consists solely of the disclosure","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Standalone written disclosure, written authorization, employer certification, summary of rights, and the pre-adverse action notice enclosing a copy of the report","domain":"law.cornell.edu","publisherName":"Cornell Legal Information Institute"},{"title":"15 U.S. Code 1681m: Requirements on users of consumer reports","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681m","excerpt":"a statement that the consumer reporting agency did not make the decision to take the adverse action and is unable to provide the consumer the specific reasons","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Contents of the final adverse action notice, including agency contact details, the statement that the agency did not make the decision, the 60-day free report right, and the right to dispute","domain":"law.cornell.edu","publisherName":"Cornell Legal Information Institute"},{"title":"Avoiding Hidden Hiring Landmines: 4-Step FCRA Compliance Plan for Handling Pre-Adverse Action Notices","url":"https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/4-step-fcra-compliance-plan.html","excerpt":"you should provide at least five business days","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"INDEPENDENT","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Common practice of allowing at least five business days between the pre-adverse action notice and the final adverse action notice, and the contents of both notices","domain":"fisherphillips.com","publisherName":"Fisher Phillips LLP"},{"title":"29 CFR 1607.3: Discrimination defined, relationship between use of selection procedures and discrimination","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/1607.3","excerpt":"the user should use the procedure which has been demonstrated to have the lesser adverse impact","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Validation requirement once a procedure shows adverse impact, and the duty to use the substantially equally valid alternative with lesser adverse impact","domain":"law.cornell.edu","publisherName":"Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School"},{"title":"29 CFR 1607.4: Information on impact (Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures)","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/1607.4","excerpt":"A selection rate for any race, sex, or ethnic group which is less than four-fifths (4/5) (or eighty percent)","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"The four-fifths rule of thumb, its qualifiers for statistical significance and small samples, and recordkeeping of impact by sex and by race and ethnic group","domain":"law.cornell.edu","publisherName":"Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School"},{"title":"Employment Tests and Selection Procedures","url":"https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/employment-tests-and-selection-procedures","excerpt":"necessary to the safe and efficient performance of the job","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Scope of covered selection procedures beyond formal tests, the job related and consistent with business necessity standard, adoption of the Uniform Guidelines in 1978, and the ADA bar on medical exams before a conditional offer","domain":"eeoc.gov","publisherName":"U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission"},{"title":"Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records in Employment Decisions Under Title VII","url":"https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/enforcement-guidance-consideration-arrest-and-conviction-records-employment-decisions","excerpt":"The fact of an arrest does not establish that criminal conduct has occurred.","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Arrest versus conviction distinction, the Green factors, individualized assessment, and exposure of blanket exclusions. Page still posted with no rescission banner on the verification date","domain":"eeoc.gov","publisherName":"U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission"},{"title":"DOJ Opinion Finds EEOC Disparate Impact Liability Guidelines Unconstitutional","url":"https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/doj-opinion-finds-eeoc-disparate-impact-liability-guidelines-unconstitutional/","excerpt":"the EEOC's Title VII guidelines on disparate impact liability are inconsistent with Title VII and the U.S. Constitution","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"INDEPENDENT","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"June 9, 2026 date and conclusion of the OLC opinion, that disparate-impact claims remain available to private litigants and under state law, and that the Uniform Guidelines and 2012 guidance were not formally rescinded","domain":"ogletree.com","publisherName":"Ogletree Deakins"},{"title":"DOJ Issues Opinion on Disparate-Impact Liability","url":"https://www.sullcrom.com/insights/blogs/2026/June/DOJ-Issues-Opinion-Disparate-Impact-Liability","excerpt":"Because EEOC's historic approach divorces liability from circumstances giving rise to a strong inference that intentional discrimination occurred, it functions as a qualified racial-proportionality mandate.","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"INDEPENDENT","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"OLC reasoning that liability attaches without regard to likely intent, treatment of background checks and aptitude tests as presumptively job related, and the narrowed business-necessity standard","domain":"sullcrom.com","publisherName":"Sullivan & Cromwell LLP"},{"title":"42 U.S. Code 12112: Discrimination, including medical examinations and inquiries","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12112","excerpt":"conduct a medical examination or make inquiries of a job applicant as to whether such applicant is an individual with a disability","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Pre-employment prohibition on medical examinations and disability inquiries, permitted inquiry into ability to perform job-related functions, post-offer entrance examination conditions and confidentiality, and administration of tests under 12112(b)(7)","domain":"law.cornell.edu","publisherName":"Cornell Legal Information Institute"},{"title":"Enforcement Guidance: Preemployment Disability-Related Questions and Medical Examinations","url":"https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/enforcement-guidance-preemployment-disability-related-questions-and-medical","excerpt":"A 'Medical Examination' is a procedure or test that seeks information about an individual's physical or mental impairments or health.","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Definition of a medical examination and the factors identifying one, treatment of physical agility, psychological, and drug tests, and the standard for a post-exam rejection","domain":"eeoc.gov","publisherName":"U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission"},{"title":"Ban the Box: U.S. Cities, Counties, and States Adopt Fair Hiring Policies","url":"https://www.nelp.org/insights-research/ban-the-box-fair-chance-hiring-state-and-local-guide/","excerpt":"37 states and over 150 cities and counties have adopted what is widely known as 'ban the box'","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"INDEPENDENT","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"37 states and more than 150 cities and counties with ban-the-box policies, and the 15 states extending the requirement to private employers","domain":"nelp.org","publisherName":"National Employment Law Project"},{"title":"Salary history bans: a running list of states and localities that have outlawed pay history questions","url":"https://www.hrdive.com/news/salary-history-ban-states-list/516662/","excerpt":"State-wide Bans: 22 ... Local Bans: 24","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"INDEPENDENT","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"22 statewide salary history bans and 24 local bans as of the April 28, 2026 tracker update, with the covered jurisdictions listed","domain":"hrdive.com","publisherName":"HR Dive"},{"title":"California Labor Code Section 1024.5 (employer use of consumer credit reports)","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=LAB§ionNum=1024.5","excerpt":"An employer or prospective employer shall not use a consumer credit report for employment purposes unless the position","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"PRIMARY","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Prohibition on employment credit reports except for enumerated positions, including managerial roles and positions with regular access to $10,000 or more in cash","domain":"leginfo.legislature.ca.gov","publisherName":"California Legislative Information"},{"title":"California's New AI Regulations Take Effect Oct. 1: Here's Your Compliance Checklist","url":"https://www.jacksonlewis.com/insights/californias-new-ai-regulations-take-effect-oct-1-heres-your-compliance-checklist","excerpt":"Employers must preserve ADS-related records, including dataset descriptors, scoring outputs, and audit findings, for four years.","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"INDEPENDENT","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"October 1, 2025 effective date of California's automated-decision system employment regulations, four-year retention of ADS records, bias testing as relevant evidence, and assessments eliciting disability information as a potential unlawful medical inquiry","domain":"jacksonlewis.com","publisherName":"Jackson Lewis"},{"title":"Enforcement of Local Law 144: Automated Employment Decision Tools","url":"https://www.osc.ny.gov/state-agencies/audits/2025/12/02/enforcement-local-law-144-automated-employment-decision-tools","excerpt":"Conduct a bias audit of the automated employment decision tool (AEDT) no more than 1 year prior to its use.","quoteText":null,"sourceRole":"INDEPENDENT","verifiedAt":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","supportsText":"Local Law 144 requirements for a bias audit within one year of use, publication of the audit summary, candidate notice, and civil penalties between $500 and $1,500 per day","domain":"osc.ny.gov","publisherName":"Office of the New York State Comptroller"}],"revisions":[],"relatedAnswers":[{"id":"72492b35-0af1-4a64-9156-e4f70d3a5618","slug":"ai-resume-screening-software-actually-work","question":"Does AI resume screening software actually work, and is it worth it (bias, accuracy)?","publishedAt":"2026-07-21T21:20:44.609","confidenceScore":82,"confidenceLabel":"High","industry":{"id":"e1a1da3c-52a8-4e99-88ad-d08ef17d7c3f","slug":"hr-technology","label":"HR Technology","description":"ATS, HRIS, payroll, and workforce management"},"topic":{"slug":"candidate-screening-assessment","label":"Candidate Screening & Assessment","description":"Background Checks, Pre-Employment Testing, Reference Checks, Skills Assessment","schemaKind":null},"contributor":{"id":"ec39deab-44fe-48d8-9029-fefe993ab85a","slug":"answer-stack","displayName":"AnswerStack","websiteUrl":null},"snippet":"Independent audits find language-model resume rankers favor some demographic groups on otherwise identical resumes. The deeper issue is what these tools are trained to predict, usually a past hiring decision rather than job performance, so a high accuracy score can mean only that the model agrees with last year's recruiters. AI screening holds up on high-volume roles with concrete requirements, used to rank rather than reject, with human review and monitored adverse impact.","url":"/q/ai-resume-screening-software-actually-work"},{"id":"8b7d74e4-7ae0-4d1e-8cff-6b3dcda9e3d4","slug":"candidates-cheat-on-online-skills-assessments-and-does-proctoring","question":"Do candidates cheat on online skills assessments, and does proctoring / anti-cheat actually stop it (including AI/ChatGPT)?","publishedAt":"2026-07-21T21:20:42.255","confidenceScore":78,"confidenceLabel":"Medium","industry":{"id":"e1a1da3c-52a8-4e99-88ad-d08ef17d7c3f","slug":"hr-technology","label":"HR Technology","description":"ATS, HRIS, payroll, and workforce management"},"topic":{"slug":"candidate-screening-assessment","label":"Candidate Screening & Assessment","description":"Background Checks, Pre-Employment Testing, Reference Checks, Skills Assessment","schemaKind":null},"contributor":{"id":"ec39deab-44fe-48d8-9029-fefe993ab85a","slug":"answer-stack","displayName":"AnswerStack","websiteUrl":null},"snippet":"Cheating on remote skills assessments is real, and generative AI widened it for coding challenges and knowledge questions. Proctoring catches tab switching, pasted code, proxy test takers, and leaked items, and it cannot see a phone outside the webcam frame. Every published detection rate is a vendor figure. Biometric identity checks and recorded video also carry Illinois BIPA and AI Video Interview Act exposure.","url":"/q/candidates-cheat-on-online-skills-assessments-and-does-proctoring"},{"id":"7c1df232-4afc-4f90-acc6-373bb41cf94d","slug":"screening-background-check-software-integrate-with-my-ats","question":"Does screening / background check software integrate with my ATS or HRIS?","publishedAt":"2026-07-21T21:20:40.075","confidenceScore":88,"confidenceLabel":"High","industry":{"id":"e1a1da3c-52a8-4e99-88ad-d08ef17d7c3f","slug":"hr-technology","label":"HR Technology","description":"ATS, HRIS, payroll, and workforce management"},"topic":{"slug":"candidate-screening-assessment","label":"Candidate Screening & Assessment","description":"Background Checks, Pre-Employment Testing, Reference Checks, Skills Assessment","schemaKind":null},"contributor":{"id":"ec39deab-44fe-48d8-9029-fefe993ab85a","slug":"answer-stack","displayName":"AnswerStack","websiteUrl":null},"snippet":"Screening and assessment vendors ship certified ATS and HRIS connectors, so ordering, status, and results move without rekeying. The mechanics that decide whether the integration helps are narrower: where the FCRA disclosure and authorization are hosted, what writes back, who can read results, and whether adverse action fires from the screening platform or your ATS.","url":"/q/screening-background-check-software-integrate-with-my-ats"},{"id":"c0112a94-3c83-4520-9777-fff00c999af6","slug":"pre-employment-tests-skills-assessments-actually-worth-it-do-they","question":"Are pre-employment tests and skills assessments actually worth it, and do they predict job performance?","publishedAt":"2026-07-21T21:20:35.197","confidenceScore":88,"confidenceLabel":"High","industry":{"id":"e1a1da3c-52a8-4e99-88ad-d08ef17d7c3f","slug":"hr-technology","label":"HR Technology","description":"ATS, HRIS, payroll, and workforce management"},"topic":{"slug":"candidate-screening-assessment","label":"Candidate Screening & Assessment","description":"Background Checks, Pre-Employment Testing, Reference Checks, Skills Assessment","schemaKind":null},"contributor":{"id":"ec39deab-44fe-48d8-9029-fefe993ab85a","slug":"answer-stack","displayName":"AnswerStack","websiteUrl":null},"snippet":"Selection tests do predict performance, but the evidence base was revised downward in 2022 after researchers showed that decades of range restriction corrections had inflated published validity. Structured interviews now top the ranking at .42, while general cognitive ability sits at .31 and carries the largest Black-White subgroup difference of any common method. Value depends on volume, measurable job requirements, what the assessment replaces, and whether you can monitor selection rates by group.","url":"/q/pre-employment-tests-skills-assessments-actually-worth-it-do-they"}],"contributorStats":{"verifiedAnswers":224,"openDisputes":0},"schemaJson":{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"Question","name":"Are pre-employment assessments and background checks legal (EEOC, ADA, FCRA, disparate impact)?","text":"Are pre-employment assessments and background checks legal (EEOC, ADA, FCRA, disparate impact)?","url":"https://www.answerstack.io/q/pre-employment-assessments-and-background-checks-legal-eeoc-ada-fcra","answerCount":1,"datePublished":"2026-07-21T21:20:37.515","author":{"@type":"Person","name":"AnswerStack Editorial Team","worksFor":{"@type":"Organization","name":"AnswerStack"},"url":"https://www.answerstack.io/contributors/answer-stack"},"about":[{"@type":"Thing","name":"Candidate Screening & Assessment"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"HR Technology"}],"acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Pre-employment assessments and background checks are generally legal in the United States, subject to conditions that differ by statute. Where a third party produces the report, the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires a written disclosure in a document consisting solely of that disclosure, the applicant's written authorization, and a pre-adverse action notice enclosing the report and a description of the applicant's rights before any decision is final [1]. Under Title VII and the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, a selection rate below four-fifths of the highest group's rate is generally regarded as evidence of adverse impact, which puts the employer to a showing of job relatedness and business necessity [5][6]. The ADA bars medical examinations and disability-related questions before a conditional job offer while permitting questions about the ability to perform job-related functions [10][11]. State fair-chance, salary history, credit report, and automated hiring tool laws add requirements and change often [12][13][14][15]. This is general information rather than legal advice.","url":"https://www.answerstack.io/q/pre-employment-assessments-and-background-checks-legal-eeoc-ada-fcra","upvoteCount":0,"datePublished":"2026-07-21T21:20:37.515","dateModified":"2026-07-21T00:00:00","author":{"@type":"Person","name":"AnswerStack Editorial Team","worksFor":{"@type":"Organization","name":"AnswerStack"},"url":"https://www.answerstack.io/contributors/answer-stack"},"citation":[{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"15 U.S. Code 1681b: Permissible purposes of consumer reports","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681b"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"15 U.S. Code 1681m: Requirements on users of consumer reports","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681m"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Avoiding Hidden Hiring Landmines: 4-Step FCRA Compliance Plan for Handling Pre-Adverse Action Notices","url":"https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/4-step-fcra-compliance-plan.html"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"29 CFR 1607.3: Discrimination defined, relationship between use of selection procedures and discrimination","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/1607.3"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"29 CFR 1607.4: Information on impact (Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures)","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/1607.4"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Employment Tests and Selection Procedures","url":"https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/employment-tests-and-selection-procedures"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records in Employment Decisions Under Title VII","url":"https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/enforcement-guidance-consideration-arrest-and-conviction-records-employment-decisions"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"DOJ Opinion Finds EEOC Disparate Impact Liability Guidelines Unconstitutional","url":"https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/doj-opinion-finds-eeoc-disparate-impact-liability-guidelines-unconstitutional/"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"DOJ Issues Opinion on Disparate-Impact Liability","url":"https://www.sullcrom.com/insights/blogs/2026/June/DOJ-Issues-Opinion-Disparate-Impact-Liability"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"42 U.S. Code 12112: Discrimination, including medical examinations and inquiries","url":"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12112"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Enforcement Guidance: Preemployment Disability-Related Questions and Medical Examinations","url":"https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/enforcement-guidance-preemployment-disability-related-questions-and-medical"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Ban the Box: U.S. Cities, Counties, and States Adopt Fair Hiring Policies","url":"https://www.nelp.org/insights-research/ban-the-box-fair-chance-hiring-state-and-local-guide/"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Salary history bans: a running list of states and localities that have outlawed pay history questions","url":"https://www.hrdive.com/news/salary-history-ban-states-list/516662/"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"California Labor Code Section 1024.5 (employer use of consumer credit reports)","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=LAB§ionNum=1024.5"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"California's New AI Regulations Take Effect Oct. 1: Here's Your Compliance Checklist","url":"https://www.jacksonlewis.com/insights/californias-new-ai-regulations-take-effect-oct-1-heres-your-compliance-checklist"},{"@type":"CreativeWork","name":"Enforcement of Local Law 144: Automated Employment Decision Tools","url":"https://www.osc.ny.gov/state-agencies/audits/2025/12/02/enforcement-local-law-144-automated-employment-decision-tools"}]}}}