 Nir Eyal (2018) rejects many of the arguments in support of focusing on health inequalities among groups. However, he offers a number of moral reasons to identify and address “status group inequalities”, that is, health inequalities “between groups that are defined along lines of social advantage and disadvantage” (Eyal 2018: 150). He takes these reasons to be compatible with, if not supported by, Lippert-Rasmussen’s inter-individual egalitarianism. We discuss two here. First, although status group inequalities are not inherently unfair, they are often “rough indicators” of underlying moral problems, including injustices such as racial discrimination or failures of social solidarity (Eyal 2018: 159). Eyal argues, second, that status group inequalities may sometimes function as a proxy for luck egalitarian injustices. Where status group inequalities exist, for example, inequality in life expectancy between low-income and high-income groups, it is likely that members of the disadvantaged group are subject to circumstances that lessen their responsibility for the outcomes in question (Eyal 2018: 161–162). Since luck egalitarians hold that inequalities due to unchosen circumstance are unjust, status-group inequalities may often function as proxies for luck egalitarian injustice.