This chapter is about examining justice with respect to animals and other non-human beings. It starts from the premise that concepts such as citizenship and human rights institute a formal equivalence among humans—even though stark material inequalities persist—whereas, in prevailing legal models any comparable framework for animals remains rudimentary at best. By analyzing ontological boundaries and the real or imagined equivalences they draw, the chapter maps the limits of existing justice discourse and offers a preliminary glimpse of how that notion might be re-imagined to include non-humans. Competing ontological schemes (animism, naturalism, and others) are reviewed to clarify the scope each affords for extending moral and political standing. Historical evidence shows that some—though not all—pre-industrial formations moderated extractive production and consumption because they relied on alternative ontological premises. The chapter concludes that contemporary rights-based approaches to animal protection, while valuable, remain entangled with growth-oriented economic systems; a fuller account of justice and multispecies co-habitation must therefore be articulated together with alternative economic models.