This article is the third installment in our AI in the Workplace series. In Part 2: From Harrisburg to the White House, Allyson Lonas explored the growing legal uncertainty surrounding artificial intelligence (“AI”) adoption in employment practices, highlighting Pennsylvania’s early efforts to regulate AI and the broader federal and state landscape. In this article, we focus on how Pennsylvania’s neighboring states are approaching AI in employment — offering a comparative view that underscores the patchwork of emerging legal obligations across state lines.
As Pennsylvania considers how to regulate and approach artificial intelligence (“AI”), some nearby states are already taking action. This article summarizes to date the key legal developments in New Jersey, New York, Maryland, Delaware, Ohio, and West Virginia — all states that border the Commonwealth — and the implications for employers in the region facing a growing patchwork of legal obligations across state lines. Here’s a quick look at how states surrounding Pennsylvania are tackling AI in employment.
New Jersey: Extending Anti-Discrimination Law to AI Tools
In January 2025, the New Jersey Attorney General and the Division on Civil Rights issued guidance clarifying how the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”) applies to the use of automated decision-making tools in the workplace. The guidance affirms that employers may be held liable for unlawful outcomes resulting from algorithmic discrimination — even where there was no discriminatory intent and the tool was developed by a third party. New Jersey positioned itself at the forefront of addressing algorithmic discrimination by making it clear that existing anti-discrimination laws extend to AI-assisted employment decisions.
New York: NYC Laying the Groundwork for Statewide Regulation while Mandating Transparency and Bias Audits
While New York State has not yet enacted AI-specific employment regulations, New York City (“NYC”) is mandating transparency and bias audits. NYC enacted Local Law 144 of 2021 to regulate automated employment decision tools by imposing requirements on employers. Under Local Law 144 of 2021, employers must:
- Conduct an independent bias audit of any automated employment decision tool prior to its use,
- Publish the audit results, and
- Provide advance notice to applicants about the use of such tools and the data being collected.
The law applies to tools that “substantially assist or replace” discretionary decision-making in the workplace. Although New York has not yet followed suit, there is clear legislative interest in extending oversight beyond the city, signaling that broader regulation may be on the horizon.
Maryland: Consent Before Using Facial Recognition
Maryland has taken a focused approach to regulating AI in the hiring process. Maryland law prohibits employers from using facial recognition technology during pre-employment interviews unless the applicant provides written consent. This state law reflects the increasing concern over potential bias resulting from the use of AI tools. While narrower than other states’ frameworks, Maryland’s statute shows a willingness to regulate AI in the future. Relatedly, in 2024, Maryland’s governor, Wes Moore, issued an executive order acknowledging the potential for bias in AI systems and encouraging responsible use within the government. While not employment-specific, the order reinforces the state’s broader recognition of discrimination risks associated with AI.
Delaware: Commission Formed to Review AI
In July 2024, Delaware established an Artificial Intelligence Commission comprised of twenty-three (23) members to study and evaluate the use of AI. The commission is tasked with making recommendations to the executive, judicial, and legislative branches regarding the development of guidelines for AI use. However, the state has not enacted any substantive AI legislation.
Ohio: Council Formed, But no Substantive AI Regulation for Employers
Ohio has not yet enacted AI-specific employment legislation but has formed a task force to study the broader implications of AI and automation in the workplace. Legislative proposals are in early stages, with a focus on workforce development, privacy, and accountability.
Furthermore, Ohio established an Artificial Intelligence Council (the “Council”) and issued a policy to guide the use of AI within state government. The Council is tasked with overseeing ethical implementation and the responsible use of AI in public agencies. While these steps reflect Ohio’s intent to position itself as a leader in AI governance, there is currently no substantive AI legislation governing an employer’s use of AI in employment.
West Virginia: No AI-Specific Laws, But AI Task Force Formed
West Virginia has not enacted AI-specific employment legislation, but a state task force has been established to study various aspects of AI, including its impact on the workforce and employment. While no regulatory framework currently exists for employers, the task force’s findings may shape future legislation in this area. As with other jurisdictions without targeted AI laws, employers must be aware of potential liability that they could face in the future from the use of algorithmic tools creating unlawful outcomes in the workplace.
It is clear that employers operating in states surrounding Pennsylvania are navigating different legal requirements when using AI in the workplace. However, common themes are emerging — transparency, accountability, consent, and liability. While many jurisdictions have not enacted AI-specific employment laws, existing anti-discrimination statutes provide a framework for addressing potential biases and discriminatory outcomes arising from the use of AI in employment.
To minimize risk and ensure compliance, employers should regularly evaluate their use of AI against both current legal requirements and emerging policy trends. Staying informed and being proactive is essential as the AI legal landscape continues to unfold.
