In this article I aim to offer a first critical assessment of the most prominent arguments in favour of restricting the voting rights of senior citizens. The first argument discussed, most thoroughly articulated by van Parijs, maintains that intergenerational justice would be improved under schemes which restrict the voting rights of senior citizens, thereby diminishing their overall electoral weight. The second argument, reconstructed from Lau's defence of child enfranchisement, maintains that the cognitive decline associated with the process of aging should lead us to treat children and senior citizens identically in respect to electoral rights; thus, if we agree that children should not have the right to vote, consistency dictates that senior citizens should be disenfranchised as well. I respond to these arguments with several objections, arguing that the former relies on a number of faulty empirical premises and has deeply unattractive implications for enfranchisement once consistently applied, and that the latter fails to make empirically salient distinctions between children and senior citizens when it comes to the political domain.

中文翻译：

---

正义、对称和投票权上限

在本文中，我的目标是对支持限制老年人投票权的最突出论点进行第一次批判性评估。讨论的第一个论点由 van Parijs 最详尽地阐述，认为在限制老年人投票权的计划下，代际正义将得到改善，从而减少他们的整体选举权重。第二个论点是从刘对儿童权利的辩护中重构的，它坚持认为与衰老过程相关的认知下降应该导致我们在选举权方面对儿童和老年人一视同仁；因此，如果我们同意儿童不应该有投票权，那么一致性要求老年人也应该被剥夺选举权。我以几个反对意见回应这些论点，