FEDERAL · 29 U.S.C. · Chapter 22
Prohibitions on lie detector use
29 U.S.C. § 2002
This text of 29 U.S.C. § 2002 (Prohibitions on lie detector use) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
29 U.S.C. § 2002.
Text
Except as provided in sections 2006 and 2007 of this title, it shall be unlawful for any employer engaged in or affecting commerce or in the production of goods for commerce—
(1)directly or indirectly, to require, request, suggest, or cause any employee or prospective employee to take or submit to any lie detector test;
(2)to use, accept, refer to, or inquire concerning the results of any lie detector test of any employee or prospective employee;
(3)to discharge, discipline, discriminate against in any manner, or deny employment or promotion to, or threaten to take any such action against—
(A)any employee or prospective employee who refuses, declines, or fails to take or submit to any lie detector test, or
(B)any employee or prospective employee on the basis of the results of any lie
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Robin Orr v. Bank of America, Nt & Sa
285 F.3d 764 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)
Darryl N. Veazey v. Communications & Cable of Chicago, Inc., D/B/A Tci Communications, Inc., Chicago Cable Tv, Tci Chicago or Tci-Chicago Cable
194 F.3d 850 (Seventh Circuit, 1999)
Hall v. United Parcel Service of America, Inc.
555 N.E.2d 273 (New York Court of Appeals, 1990)
United States Department of Labor Robert B. Reich, Secretary of U.S. Department of Labor v. Rapid Robert's Inc. Robert E. Wilson, Jr..
130 F.3d 345 (Eighth Circuit, 1998)
Fernandez v. Mora-San Miguel Electric Cooperative, Inc.
462 F.3d 1244 (Tenth Circuit, 2006)
Sabrina Polkey v. Transtecs Corporation
404 F.3d 1264 (Eleventh Circuit, 2005)
Donald Bass v. Wendy's of Downtown, Inc.
526 F. App'x 599 (Sixth Circuit, 2013)
Lyle v. Mercy Hospital Anderson
876 F. Supp. 157 (S.D. Ohio, 1995)
Buerger v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
982 F. Supp. 1247 (E.D. Texas, 1997)
Cummings v. Washington Mutual
650 F.3d 1386 (Eleventh Circuit, 2011)
James v. Professionals' Detective Agency, Inc.
876 F. Supp. 1013 (N.D. Illinois, 1995)
Wiltshire v. Citibank
171 Misc. 2d 250 (New York Supreme Court, 1996)
Sunderlin v. First Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co.
235 F. Supp. 2d 222 (W.D. New York, 2002)
Blackwell v. 53rd-Ellis Currency Exchange
852 F. Supp. 646 (N.D. Illinois, 1994)
Del Canto v. ITT Sheraton Corp.
865 F. Supp. 927 (District of Columbia, 1994)
Campbell v. Woodard Photographic, Inc.
433 F. Supp. 2d 857 (N.D. Ohio, 2006)
Miguel Clime v. Sunwest PEO
253 F. App'x 805 (Eleventh Circuit, 2007)
M. G. v. Metropolitan Interpreters & Translators, Inc.
62 F. Supp. 3d 1189 (S.D. California, 2014)
Escalante v. Rapid Armored Corp.
183 Misc. 2d 135 (New York Supreme Court, 1999)
Taylor v. EPOC Clinic, Inc.
437 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (M.D. Florida, 2006)
Source Credit
History
(Pub. L. 100–347, §3, June 27, 1988, 102 Stat. 646.)
Editorial Notes
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Effective Date
Section effective 6 months after June 27, 1988, except that rules and regulations shall be issued not later than 90 days after June 27, 1988, see section 11 of Pub. L. 100–347, set out as a note under section 2001 of this title.
Effective Date
Section effective 6 months after June 27, 1988, except that rules and regulations shall be issued not later than 90 days after June 27, 1988, see section 11 of Pub. L. 100–347, set out as a note under section 2001 of this title.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
29 U.S.C. § 2002, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/29/2002.