Prominent theories of justice conjoin the capabilities approach and a doctrine of ‘political liberalism’. The latter maintains that the exercise of state power is morally legitimate only if it is justifiable by appeal to principles that all reasonable citizens can accept, each from her own evaluative perspective. As standardly interpreted, political liberalism rules out selecting state policies on perfectionist grounds. The political perfectionist holds that it is morally mandatory for the state to promote certain activities and conditions on the ground that they are intrinsically valuable. The claim then is that reasonable citizens will differ widely in their beliefs about these intrinsic value matters, so a state that chooses its policies by appeal to perfectionist judgements will be morally illegitimate. This chapter canvasses recent debate on this issue, and suggests that the marriage of the capabilities approach and political liberalism is ill-advised. Political liberalism should be dropped, whether or not one adheres to the capabilities approach. A modest, common-sense perfectionism cohabits harmoniously with the capabilities approach.