I've had a think about this and I think that Sujato misses the mark and there is

merit to Thanissaro's case.

Mata yatha niya? putta?, ayusa ekaputtamanurakkhe;

Evampi sabbabhutesu, Manasa? bhavaye aparima?a?.

Grammatically, the core of the simile is

"As mother protects child, so you cultivate mind"

The clauses parallel one another, as is usual in a simile, and instruct the reader
to cultivate the mind with the same intensity and focus with which a mother
protects her child. This is the plain meaning of the couplet. Sujato sees this,
commenting that "The two padas reflect each other, pivoting on the optative verbs
[...] One should protect one�s child; one should develop one�s heart limitlessly.
It doesn�t say you should protect your heart limitlessly." This is correct and
Thanissaro does err when he repeats "protect" with both subjects. But Sujato then
goes on to speculate on what the meaning of cultivating a limitless mind is: he
inserts the word "metta", which doesn't appear in these lines and is unnecessary.
Cultivating a limitless mind toward all beings is just what it says, there's no
need to add "love" or anything else. The grammar as it stands is clear; moreover,
the notion of cultivating this or that sort of mind is a common trope in the suttas
- like a catskin bag is perhaps my favorite.

You write: "Thanissaro is arguing against taking this verse as an exhortation for
us to sacrifice ourselves: �Nowhere does he tell people to throw down their lives
to prevent every cruelty and injustice in the world.� But who would be claiming
that we should? I suspect that in arguing against that (possibly straw man)
argument he�s gotten a bit carried away and is denying what the verse is saying,
which is, in Sujato�s words, �one should develop a boundless heart (of metta) for
all beings, as a mother would protect (with metta) her only child.�"

The idea of throwing down one's life comes from the very translations Thanissaro is
challenging. The Amaravati translation has "Even as a mother protects with her life
her child, her only child" - it's a very small step from "protect with your life"
to "sacrifice your life for". This idea of giving one's life is present in the
Pali: "ayusa" - with one's life. Sujato completely ignores this word in his
rendering, indeed he has to in order to get the result he's aiming at: �one should
develop a boundless heart (of metta) for all beings, as a mother would protect
(with metta) her only child.�" - Sujato has replaced "with her life" with "with
metta". I see no basis in the text for making this substitution. However in the
Thanissaro approach, "ayusa" presents no problems: it emphasizes the dedication the
meditator must bring to his cultivation.

Finally I note that you quoted Thanissaro's own translation in your initial
response, saying that it means pretty much the same as the other ones. Yet by
Thanissaro's own explanation it cannot mean the same: he has intentionally
translated the passage differently from at least some other translations, the
Amaravati version definitely being one of them. I hope I've made clear that he has
genuine grounds for doing so.