The coronavirus pandemic has reignited the debate over urban density. Popular media has been quick to blame density as a key contributor to rapid disease transmission, questioning whether compact cities are still a desirable planning goal. Past research on the density–pandemic connection have produced mixed results. This article offers a critical perspective on this debate by unpacking the effects of alternative measures of urban density, and examining the impacts of mandatory lockdowns and the stringency of other government restrictions on cumulative Covid-19 infection and mortality rates during the early phase of the pandemic in the US. Our results show a consistent positive effect of density on Covid-19 outcomes across urban areas during the first six months of the outbreak. However, we find modest variations in the density–pandemic relationship depending on how densities are measured. We also find relatively longer duration mandatory lockdowns to be associated with lower infection and mortality rates, and lockdown duration’s effect to be relatively more pronounced in high-density urban areas. Moreover, we find that the timing of lockdown imposition and the stringency of the government’s response additionally influence Covid-19 outcomes, and that the effects vary by urban density. We argue that the adverse impact of density on pandemics could be mitigated by adopting strict lockdowns and other stringent human mobility and interaction restriction policies in a spatially targeted manner. Our study helps to inform current and future government policies to contain the virus, and to make our cities more resilient against future shocks and threats.