Animals Should Get 'Right To Vote,' Legal Researcher Argues

Animals should have voting rights, a legal researcher has suggested.

A paper published in the journal Analysis by Ioan-Radu Motoarcă, an associate at Ashman Law Offices in Illinois, reported that extending voting rights to animals would merely be extending practices that are already in place, where "certain governments permit the enforcement of animals' legal rights through representatives."

"Before defending this view, it is worth emphasizing two features of the proposal I have in mind," Motoarcă wrote in the study. "First, the system of animal voting I am envisaging would involve appointed representatives casting votes on behalf of animals."

For example, there are already representatives for children, or people with mental disabilities, when it comes to legal issues. According to Motoarcă, animals should have the same luxury.

"The idea that animals should have the right to vote sounds preposterous. Accordingly, most authors who have touched on the issue dismiss it in few words as obviously absurd," the study read. "However, I will argue that we can understand this idea as a natural outcome of our fundamental democratic commitments. Consequently, I believe governments should recognize a political right to vote for at least certain categories of animals."

To give animals voting rights would be to follow the "all affected interests" principle, the study added. This principle goes by the understanding that anyone who is affected by the policies of a government should, in theory, have a say in that government.

"If you are a supporter of democracy (as opposed to some other political arrangement), and if you really reflect on the best reasons we have for including or excluding certain categories of beings from our democratic community—think about the historical treatment of minorities in the political process—it is not going to be easy to exclude animals from that community," Motoarcă told Newsweek. "Otherwise, of course, there might be independent reasons why giving animals voting rights is a good idea. For example, it may contribute to a decrease in animal suffering. Hence, if you think animal suffering is bad, then a decrease in suffering would be a good thing."

While the idea may still seem absurd, Motoarcă noted that governments did not always allow basic voting rights to many people, including women and slaves.

The study said there would have been what seemed like "obvious justifications at the time."

People may still argue that animals are physically not able to vote, or comprehend a government's policies. However, Motoarcă reiterated that this is not a good enough reason to not allow them a say.

"A lot is going to depend on how exactly such a proposal is implemented. For instance, who will be acting as animal representatives?" Motoarcă said. "I think it would be important to maintain neutrality here, so that the representatives would be neutral persons who do not have any particular axe to grind and can assess the scientific evidence rationally. Even if complete neutrality is unlikely, that would still be the ideal standard. Another important area of future research is what to do when the interests of various groups of animals are in conflict, because a policy may benefit some while harming others. Those are going to be tough decisions, but it doesn't mean they would be impossible to make. After all, legislators vote on policies that benefit some groups of people while harming others all the time."

Update 01/25/24, 03:02 a.m. ET: This article was updated with direct quotes from Ioan Motoarcă.

Do you have a tip on a science story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have a question about animals and voting rights? Let us know via science@newsweek.com.