In the wake of the COVID-19 boom in remote administration of language tests, it appears likely that remote administration will be a permanent fixture in the language testing landscape. Accordingly, language test providers, stakeholders, and researchers must grapple with the implications of remote proctoring on valid, fair, and just uses of tests. Drawing on an argument-based approach to fairness and justice, which subsumes validity, we articulate key sub-claims, warrants, rebuttals, and relevant backing related to the use of remote proctoring in language tests. With respect to meaningfulness as a core element of fairness, we focus on how remote proctoring is both a bulwark against construct-irrelevant responses (cheating) and a potential source of construct-irrelevant variance due to inauthentic constraints on test-taking conditions. Other fairness concerns relate to technological biases across racial/ethnic groups and access to suitable technology and physical space for remote proctoring. For justice, we consider the consequences and social values of remote-proctored language tests (Coghlan et al., 2021). We propose that these articulations of remote proctoring issues within Kunnan's fairness and justice framework can usefully motivate and guide research on as well as critique of testing procedures and test uses.