In this chapter, I explore the implications of historical injustice for contemporary debates surrounding the ethics of migration, questioning how, if at all, states should respond to historical injustice in their various migration and asylum policies. In Part I, I map out some of the interrelations between migration and historical injustice during the various stages which migrants may pass through, including emigration, admission to another state’s territory, migrants’ acquisition of membership, and repatriation. I suggest that migration and the processes surrounding it may both compound historical injustice, and potentially offer an important form of reparation for that injustice. In Part II, I examine theoretical debates surrounding migration and historical justice, surveying work that applies principles of reparative justice to the ethics of migration and asylum. This work suggests overall that, while migration may play a potentially significant role in redressing historical injustice, and states often should use their migration and asylum policies to offer reparation to those affected by the legacies of historical injustice, there are various theoretical and practical complications surrounding this line of thought—for instance, surrounding issues of causality, responsibility, state capability, and the prioritisation of migrants for entry—which need to be addressed in order for these arguments to fully succeed. I conclude by identifying additional aspects of this controversy which merit further research and analysis, such as the need for greater engagement with empirical evidence to begin to ascertain the reparative duties of actual states towards migrants in practice.