Do not ask the applicant to take a lie detector test when the state's page forbids the request.
Key takeaways for whether you may ask an applicant to take a lie detector test
- Remove the polygraph step from the interview plan if the applicant is in Massachusetts, as the page makes it unlawful to subject a person to, or request a person to take, a lie detector test and cites a fine of not more than one thousand dollars nor less than three hundred dollars for violations according to Massachusetts General Court.
- Drop the honesty test requirement for Maryland applicants, since the page states an employer who violates the section is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine not exceeding $100 according to Maryland General Assembly.
- Exclude voice stress analysis from Minnesota interviews, because the page specifies that no employer or agent shall directly or indirectly solicit or require a polygraph, voice stress analysis, or any test purporting to test the honesty of any employee or prospective employee according to Minnesota Revisor of Statutes.
- Cease requesting lie detector tests for Wisconsin applicants, as the page prohibits directly or indirectly requiring, requesting, suggesting, or causing an employee or prospective employee to take or submit to a lie detector test according to Wisconsin Legislature.
- Stop inquiring about test results in Wisconsin, since the page also forbids using, accepting, referring to, or inquiring about the results of a lie detector test of an employee or prospective employee according to Wisconsin Legislature.
How the four state pages bar the request
For a recruiter or hiring manager, the immediate action is to remove any such test from the interview plan if the applicant is located in one of these jurisdictions. The scope of the ban varies slightly by state, but the core restriction on requesting the test is consistent across the four sources.
In Massachusetts, the law explicitly states that it is unlawful for an employer or their agent to subject a person applying for employment to, or request such person to take, a lie detector test. This prohibition applies whether the test is administered within or outside the commonwealth. The statute covers any person applying for employment, including those applying for positions as a police officer. It also prohibits discharging, not hiring, demoting, or otherwise discriminating against a person for asserting rights under this section. According to Massachusetts General Court, the request itself is unlawful, not just the administration of the test.
Maryland's statute focuses on the requirement or demand of a polygraph examination. The law states that an employer may not require or demand, as a condition of employment, prospective employment, or continued employment, that an individual submit to or take a polygraph examination or similar test. This phrasing captures both new hires and current employees, ensuring that the test cannot be used as a gatekeeper for future job opportunities. According to Maryland General Assembly, the demand is barred when tied to employment conditions.
What each page counts as a lie detector test
The scope of the ban depends on how the specific state defines the term. You must verify whether your proposed test falls within the definition before scheduling it.
Massachusetts defines a lie detector test broadly to include written assessments. According to Massachusetts General Court, the term "lie detector test" means any test utilizing a polygraph or any other device, mechanism, instrument or written examination. This definition applies when the test is operated, or its results are used or interpreted by an examiner. The purpose must be to purport to assist in or enable the detection of deception, the verification of truthfulness, or the rendering of a diagnostic opinion regarding the honesty of an individual. This means a vendor's written honesty quiz is included in this definition if an examiner interprets the results to judge honesty.
Wisconsin defines the term with a focus on specific devices. According to Wisconsin Legislature, a "lie detector" means a polygraph, deceptograph, voice stress analyzer, psychological stress evaluator or other similar device. The device must be mechanical or electrical. The definition applies when the device is used, or its results are used, to render a diagnostic opinion about the honesty or dishonesty of an individual. This scope covers voice stress analysis and other similar mechanical or electrical tools used for diagnostic purposes regarding honesty.
Check your vendor's materials against these definitions. If the tool is a written examination interpreted by an examiner to detect deception, it fits the Massachusetts definition. If it is a mechanical or electrical device like a voice stress analyzer used to render a diagnostic opinion on honesty, it fits the Wisconsin definition. Do not assume a test is outside the ban if it is not a traditional polygraph. The definitions are specific to these pages and do not describe the rules in other states.
Filled reference table of four lie-detector bans
The table below summarizes the prohibitions found in the four state pages. Each row identifies the publisher and the specific conduct the page forbids.
| publisher | what the page forbids |
|---|---|
| Massachusetts General Court | Subjecting or requesting an employee or applicant to take a lie detector test, or discriminating against them for asserting rights, including for police officer applicants. |
| Maryland General Assembly | Requiring or demanding, as a condition of employment, prospective employment, or continued employment, that an individual submit to or take a polygraph examination or similar test. |
| Minnesota Revisor of Statutes | Directly or indirectly soliciting or requiring a polygraph, voice stress analysis, or any test purporting to test the honesty of any employee or prospective employee. |
| Wisconsin Legislature | Directly or indirectly requiring, requesting, suggesting, or causing an employee or prospective employee to take a lie detector test, or using, accepting, referring to, or inquiring about the results. |
The fine or time the page states:
| publisher | the fine or time the page states |
|---|---|
| Massachusetts General Court | A fine of not more than one thousand dollars nor less than three hundred dollars; a civil action within three years of the violation. |
| Maryland General Assembly | A misdemeanor and a fine not exceeding $100. |
According to Massachusetts General Court, the ban applies to any employer or agent with respect to employees or applicants, including those applying for police officer positions. The same page punishes a violation by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars nor less than three hundred dollars and sets a three-year window for civil actions. According to Maryland General Assembly, the prohibition covers polygraph examinations or similar tests demanded as a condition of employment. The page defines the violation as a misdemeanor with a specific fine cap. According to Minnesota Revisor of Statutes, the law bars soliciting or requiring polygraphs, voice stress analysis, or honesty tests for employees or prospective employees. According to Wisconsin Legislature, the statute forbids requiring, requesting, or suggesting a lie detector test, as well as using or inquiring about the results. Use this table to verify if your interview plan includes any step that matches these prohibited actions.
Maryland application notice to print
The Maryland General Assembly's statute text page specifies that an employer may not require or demand, as a condition of employment, prospective employment, or continued employment, that an individual submit to or take a polygraph examination or similar test, according to Maryland General Assembly. This prohibition applies to a person engaged in a business, industry, profession, trade, or other enterprise in the State, as defined in the same section, according to Maryland General Assembly. Print this notice on the application: "Under Maryland law, an employer may not require or demand, as a condition of employment, prospective employment, or continued employment, that an individual submit to or take a polygraph examination or similar test."
An employer who violates any provision of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to a fine not exceeding $100, according to Maryland General Assembly. The fine amount is capped at one hundred dollars for each conviction. The definition of employer includes any person engaged in a business, industry, profession, trade, or other enterprise in the State, according to Maryland General Assembly.
Check the applicant's location against this definition. If the business operates in Maryland, the ban applies. Remove the polygraph step from the interview plan. Record the decision in the hiring file.
Fines and time limits the pages state
Massachusetts General Law - Part I, Title XXI, Chapter 149, Section 19B specifies the financial penalties for violating its provisions. The page states that any person who violates any provision of the section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars nor less than three hundred dollars, according to Massachusetts General Court. This range applies to the violation itself, distinct from any civil action an aggrieved person might bring.
The same page outlines the timeframe and scope for civil actions. It notes that any person aggrieved by a violation of subsection (2) may institute a civil action within three years of such violation, according to Massachusetts General Court. The page specifies that this action can be prosecuted in the person's own name and on their own behalf, or for themselves and for other similarly situated individuals. The potential remedies include injunctive relief and any damages thereby incurred, including treble damages for any loss of wages or other benefits, according to Massachusetts General Court.
The page also addresses the location of the test administration. It states that the fact that such lie detector test was to be, or was, administered outside the commonwealth for employment within the commonwealth shall not be a valid defense to an action brought under the provisions of subsection (3) or (4), according to Massachusetts General Court. This clause ensures that the geographic location of the test does not shield a violator from the penalties or civil actions described in the preceding subsections.
Review the specific fine range and the three-year civil action window when drafting your interview compliance notes. Verify that your internal policies align with the requirement that out-of-state administration does not provide a defense for employment within the commonwealth.
Illustrative example of four checks on one plan
A manager has one interview plan and four applicants. The plan still lists a lie detector step. The manager checks the four state pages before the interviews and removes that step where a page bars the request. For a Maryland application, the manager prints the notice above. If an employee asks for a polygraph, the manager says the test is voluntary. The manager writes the decision in the hiring file. The counts of one and four are illustrative.
Do this before the next interview
Remove any lie detector step from the interview plan, then record the decision in the hiring file. Use Hiring Decision Debrief: Notes to a Recorded Decision for that record. Before a reference call, read Check 4 state limits before you answer a reference call. If the interview asks about pay history, read Salary history questions: 3 state rules to check.
When recording your decision, note that if an employee requests a polygraph test, any employer or agent administering the test shall inform the employee that taking the test is voluntary, according to Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. This requirement applies specifically when the test is requested by the employee, not when the employer initiates it.
Lie detector ban FAQ
Does Massachusetts's page allow asking for the test if it happens in another state?
No. The page states that administering the test outside the commonwealth for employment within the commonwealth is not a valid defense to an action brought under the relevant subsections, according to Massachusetts General Court. This rule applies specifically to employment within the commonwealth.
What fine does Maryland's required application notice name?
The page identifies a fine not exceeding $100 for a misdemeanor violation, according to Maryland General Assembly. An employer who violates any provision of the section is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to this fine on conviction.
Does Minnesota's page let an employer require a polygraph?
No. The page prohibits employers or their agents from directly or indirectly soliciting or requiring a polygraph, voice stress analysis, or any test purporting to test the honesty of any employee or prospective employee, according to Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. This ban covers both current employees and prospective employees.
What does Wisconsin's page say about using a test result?
The page forbids using, accepting, referring to, or inquiring about the results of a lie detector test of an employee or prospective employee, according to Wisconsin Legislature. This prohibition applies to both employees and prospective employees.
Does Massachusetts's page limit the ban to a machine, or does it also mention a written examination?
The page defines the term "lie detector test" to include any test utilizing a polygraph or any other device, mechanism, instrument, or written examination, according to Massachusetts General Court. The definition covers tests operated or interpreted by an examiner to assist in detecting deception, verifying truthfulness, or rendering a diagnostic opinion regarding honesty.