The issue of reparations to the descendants of persons enslaved in the United States is receiving increasing attention in both the public sphere (e.g., 2020 Presidential campaigns) and in academic circles. However, the term “reparations” often goes undefined in such discussions, despite the fact that different types of government action (e.g., an apology versus financial payments) are associated with varying levels of public opposition (or support). We also know little about how attitudes toward reparations explicitly targeting the consequences of slavery differ from attitudes toward more generic race-targeted policies. Drawing on data from an online survey of white Americans conducted in 2016, we examine how levels of opposition to a range of different race-targeted government actions varies by (1) the type and aims of the intervention, and (2) whites’ social locations and political orientations. Regarding policy type, whites are least opposed to selected symbolic reparations (e.g., a memorial to enslaved persons) and to policies designed to ensure “fair treatment” of black Americans in the workplace. Whites are most opposed to reparations in the form of direct financial payments to black Americans and to policies involving “preferential treatment” of blacks in the workplace. In addition, whites who are older, more conservative, and who view race relations as unimportant are most opposed to the reparations and other race-based policies we examine. We conclude with suggestions for future work on this timely topic.