The most prominent objection to affirmative action policies is the "unfairness objection," which alleges that affirmative action policies treat meritorious applicants unfairly by denying them opportunities in favor of those who are less meritorious. I argue that the most common response to the unfairness objection misunderstands its force, and so talks past the objector. A second type of response is on target but incomplete. I propose and defend a third type of response—tempered meritocracy—according to which meritocracy is often instrumental to equal opportunity but is not required by it. Only tempered meritocracy, I argue, can respond to the unfairness objection on its own terms.