Ban the Box

There is mixed evidence about the effects of Ban the Box (BTB) laws on employment for individuals with criminal convictions across the public and private sectors^{5, 6}. Some studies show positive effects, increasing callbacks and the likelihood of employment or hiring for those previously convicted for a crime^{2, 7, 8}. However, others show no impact on hiring⁹ or suggest reductions in employment among those with criminal records¹⁰. There is also mixed evidence on whether there are unintended consequences for individuals without criminal records, with studies showing no impact, positive, and negative effects^{5, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14}.

Impacts among intended populations. Some studies show positive effects, including increased likelihood of public sector employment for individuals with criminal records nationwide⁷ and increased percentages of such individuals hired following BTB implementation in Washington, D.C. and Durham County, NC². However, an analysis of BTB laws in Seattle found no significant employment effects⁹, and a study of Massachusetts’s Criminal Offender Record Information Reform (CORI), which includes a BTB provision and record access reform, suggests it may have led to reductions in employment among those with criminal records¹⁰. Audit studies in Chicago, and New York and New Jersey suggest that BTB may increase employer call backs to individuals with criminal records^{8, 15}; however, in the New York and New Jersey study there were significant decreases in call backs to Black men without criminal records, offsetting any gains to Black men with records¹⁵.

Potential unintended consequences. The finding from the New York and New Jersey audit study suggested some employers may be influenced by implicit bias, consciously or unconsciously screening out “Black sounding” names due to assumptions that such individuals are more likely to have a criminal background¹. This finding has prompted other studies to look for such unintended consequences in BTB implementation. One nationwide study of existing BTB laws, which apply mainly to public employers but include some that apply to private employers as well, suggests they may increase employment among older men who are Black without a college degree and younger women who are Black with a college degree, but may also decrease hiring among young men who are Black or Hispanic who did not finish high school or get a GED¹³. Another study suggests BTB may increase employment of residents of high crime neighborhoods, particularly in public sector and low wage jobs¹⁴.

Another study looked at both the Current Population Survey (CPS) and the larger American Community Survey (ACS) and found effects on individuals without records who are minorities to be more ambiguous, with CPS data suggesting there were harms to such workers while ACS data found none; differences in results may be due to different frequencies of the surveys⁵. Another nationwide study using ACS data found an initial increase in the Black-White employment gap, however it returned to its previous level within three years and narrowed from there¹¹. Nationwide data that exclusively examined public sector BTB laws indicates no change in the likelihood of public sector employment of young, low-skilled males from racialized backgrounds following BTB implementation⁷, and another, including more private sector employers, saw no significant employment effects for young men of any race with less than a 4 year degree¹². An older study suggests that employers who conduct background checks appear more likely to hire Black men than employers that do not, particularly employers averse to hiring individuals with criminal records¹⁶.

Best practices. Studies looking at more comprehensive BTB policies suggest such laws may reduce recidivism^{10, 17}. Experts suggest that BTB should be implemented as a part of a comprehensive approach, including outreach about BTB to employers and individuals with records, structured disclosure processes, enhanced enforcement mechanisms for equal employment violations, and record-sealing or expungement initiatives^{2, 6, 18, 19}. Experts also suggest combining limits on criminal record questions with reductions in liability of negligent hiring to provide protection to employers with liability concerns¹, and implementing BTB in college admissions processes, given evidence that increasing access to education appears to reduce subsequent criminal behavior²⁰.

As of 2021, 37 states over 150 local city and county governments have passed Ban the Box (BTB) legislation, and over four-fifths of the U.S. population lives in a jurisdiction covered by BTB. Fifteen states and 22 localities have laws that also include private employers²¹. Many large private employers, such as Walmart, Target, and Home Depot, have voluntarily adopted BTB, along with some hospitals².

^‡ Resources with a focus on equity.

AIC-Ban the Box - All-In Cities, an Initiative of PolicyLink. All-In Cities Policy Toolkit: Ban the box/fair chance hiring.

NELP-Fair Chance Hiring for Employers - National Employment Law Project (NELP). (n.d.). Fair chance hiring resources for employers. Retrieved April 9, 2026.