My dissertation explores the normative significance of benefitting from injustice and the moral cost of non-targeted forms of redress. Ch. 1 provides a novel answer to the question, "why do beneficiaries of injustice have special moral reasons to resist the injustices that benefit them?" Ch. 2 fills in a gap in the literature on benefitting from injustice. Even if individual beneficiaries have prima facie remedial obligations, on what basis can the state impose the cost of reparation onto beneficiaries of injustice? Ch. 3 addresses the issue of pushback to targeted forms of redress (specifically, reparations to Black Americans). It is becoming popular to advocate for universal, "big tent" solutions to racial inequality. These solutions are thought to be more politically ecumenical and thereby more likely to deflate pushback. If so, we have strong pragmatic reasons to pursue these types of political interventions on racial inequality, steering clear of targetted forms of redress. I argue that there are certain moral costs to this route.

"Fine-tuning Arguments and Biological Design Arguments: Can the Theist Have Both?" Religious Studies (2020).