In the theatre of climate change, the loudest cries often belong to humans, while faint echoes of non-human suffering fade unheard into the background. Climate change, though universal in nature, often remains selectively compassionate in its remedies. Each environmental catastrophe, from flood to drought, or wildfire to cyclone, leaves behind the traces of non-human invisible victims: animals are left behind to starve, die, migrate, or perish without a single legal remedy or recognition provided to them. The law remains deaf to all animals that flee from flames, drown in floods, and slowly yet gradually vanish from our ecosystem. Despite their sentience, feelings, and emotions, they remain non-living entities from the damage caused by disasters or climate change. Yet, when disaster strikes, the law counts bodies, not lives. The law tries to rebuild cities, not ecosystems. The current jurisprudence often fails to see and treat them as anything beyond just a resource, property, or mere ecological component. They often forget the fact that even animals share the same planet as ours and treat them as victims of rights or beings that are capable of suffering like us humans. This research paper seeks to explore the legal void in protecting animals during environmental catastrophes – a void born not just of mere ignorance but of moral negligence. Through this multifaceted lens combining law, morals, ethics, animal rights, and jurisprudence, this paper aims to interrogate: Can a law that excludes the voiceless ever claim to be just? What happens when the climate justice movement fails to see beyond the human species? And how can legal frameworks evolve to include non-human victims as well in the fight against climate change?