Score Everyone Against the Same List
For the resumes that clear the first pass, score each against the same rubric rather than against each other. "Compared to the last one I read" is how bias and fatigue creep in around resume 80. A simple scorecard, even one to five per criterion, gives you a ranked shortlist you can defend to the partners and to yourself.
Handle AI-Written Resumes with Care, not a Delete Key
You will see them: polished, confident and oddly generic. The tell is usually the absence of specifics. A genuine legal resume names the case types, the filing systems, the volume handled and a concrete result. An AI-padded one praises a "detail-oriented professional" without ever landing on any particulars.
If software is scoring or ranking your applicants, you may owe candidates notice, you should be able to show your process is job-related and not discriminatory, and you should keep records of how decisions were made.
Treat that as a reason to read more closely, not a reason to auto-reject. Some of your strongest candidates are non-native English speakers who use writing tools to sound polished, and their substantive skills may be exactly what the role needs. Auto-rejecting "AI-sounding" resumes quietly screens those people out, and, as the next section explains, it can create real legal exposure.
Know the New Hiring Rules, Even as a Small Firm
This is the part most firms have not reckoned with, and it is squarely in an administrator's lane. Several jurisdictions now regulate automated tools used in hiring. New York City's Local Law 144 requires a bias audit and candidate notice when an automated employment decision tool is used to screen or rank applicants for a role in the city. Illinois, Colorado and California have their own requirements taking effect around now. The thresholds vary, but the theme is consistent: If software is scoring or ranking your applicants, you may owe candidates notice, you should be able to show your process is job-related and not discriminatory, and you should keep records of how decisions were made.
You do not need to route this to outside counsel. Three habits cover most of it: Use a consistent, job-related rubric (like the one you built above), never let a tool auto-reject without a human reviewing, and keep a short record of why each candidate advanced or did not. That record protects the firm if a rejected applicant or a regulator ever asks, and it makes the next hire better.
Keep a Simple Record
For each candidate who advances or gets set aside, note the reason in one sentence tied to the rubric: "no litigation experience," or "strong real-estate closing background, moved to phone screen." It takes seconds, and it converts a stressful, subjective pile into a process the firm can stand behind, repeat and hand off.
The Payoff
None of this requires new headcount or new software. Just follow this process: rubric first, a must-haves pass, consistent scoring, careful handling of AI resumes and a light record. Done in that order, screening 200 applications becomes an afternoon instead of two weeks, and the person who starts on Monday is more likely to be the one the firm actually needed.
