Learn Hardcore French: Je trouve important que la loi protège la justice et l’égalité pour tout le monde. - I find it important that the law protects justice and equality for everyone.

Je trouve important que la loi protège…
Je trouve que c’est important que la loi protège… / Je trouve qu’il est important que la loi protège…

The version in your sentence is a bit more compact and slightly more formal. Grammatically:

In Je trouve important que…, the verb trouve is followed directly by an adjective (important) plus a que‑clause.
In Je trouve qu’il est important que…, the verb trouve is followed by a whole clause (qu’il est important que…).

Meaning and nuance are almost the same. The main thing to remember: both are correct; the sentence just chooses the shorter pattern.

Why is it important and not importante? What is important agreeing with?

Here, important is not agreeing with la loi (feminine). It belongs to a construction that behaves like an impersonal il est important de/que….

You can think of:

Je trouve important que… ≈ Je trouve qu’il est important que…

In il est important, important is in the default masculine singular “neuter” form, because il is just a dummy subject, not a real masculine noun.

Since Je trouve important que… is basically a shortened version of that, important stays in masculine singular and does not change to importante.

Is protège here indicative or subjunctive? I thought the subjunctive was used after que in this kind of sentence.

Formally, in que la loi protège la justice et l’égalité, protège is subjunctive.

However, for -er verbs, the present indicative and present subjunctive forms are identical in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd person singular and 3rd person plural:

Indicative: la loi protège
Subjunctive: que la loi protège

So you can’t see the difference in writing or pronunciation here, but the rule behind it is:

Expressions of judgment/necessity/emotion + que
- different subject → subjunctive
  - Je trouve important que la loi protège…
  - Il est nécessaire que la loi protège…

So yes, grammatically it’s the subjunctive; it just happens to look the same as the indicative.

But I learned that je trouve que takes the indicative, not the subjunctive. Why is this different?

There are two different patterns:

Je trouve que + statement
→ expresses an opinion; normally takes the indicative:
- Je trouve que la loi protège bien les citoyens.
  (I think the law protects citizens well.)
Je trouve + adjective + que + clause
→ expresses a value judgment (importance, necessity, etc.); this triggers the subjunctive:
- Je trouve important que la loi protège la justice et l’égalité.

So your sentence is in pattern 2, not pattern 1, which is why it uses the subjunctive.

Who is the subject of protège? Is it la loi or la justice et l’égalité?

The subject of protège is la loi.

The structure is:

que la loi protège [la justice et l’égalité pour tout le monde]

So:

la loi = subject
protège = verb
la justice et l’égalité = what the law protects (direct objects)

Even though in English you might focus on “justice and equality”, in French the grammar is clear: la loi is doing the protecting.

Why is it protège (singular) and not protègent (plural)?

Because the subject is singular:

la loi → singular noun → protège

If the subject were plural, you’d use protègent:

les lois protègent la justice et l’égalité.

The fact that la justice et l’égalité is a pair doesn’t matter here; they are objects, not the subject.

Why is it l’égalité and not la égalité?

This is a case of elision in French:

la
- vowel sound → l’
  - la égalité → l’égalité
  - la école → l’école

You must use l’ before a noun that:

starts with a vowel (a, e, i, o, u) or
starts with a mute h,

when the article would otherwise be le or la.

So égalité starts with a vowel sound, therefore l’égalité.

Why is it pour tout le monde and not pour tous le monde?

Tout le monde is a fixed expression meaning “everyone”.

Grammar-wise, you can analyze it as:

tout
- le monde
  but the whole group behaves like a singular pronoun (“everybody”).

Forms of tout:

tout (m. sg.)
toute (f. sg.)
tous (m. pl.)
toutes (f. pl.)

Here we use the masculine singular tout, because le monde is masculine singular.

So:

✅ pour tout le monde = for everyone
❌ pour tous le monde = incorrect in this sense

Why is it pour tout le monde instead of something like de tout le monde?

Pour here means “for (the benefit of)”:

pour tout le monde = for everyone (in the interest of everyone)

If you used de tout le monde, it would suggest a different relationship, like possession or origin:

la loi protège les droits de tout le monde
= the law protects everyone’s rights (rights of everyone)

In your sentence, the idea is “justice and equality for everyone”, so pour is the natural preposition.

What is the difference between la loi, la justice, and le droit in French?

la loi = a specific law / the body of laws (written rules made by the state)
- La loi interdit la discrimination. (The law forbids discrimination.)
la justice =
1. fairness / justice as a moral concept
2. the justice system (courts, judges, etc.)
  - La justice doit être impartiale. (Justice must be impartial.)
le droit =
1. (the study of) law as a field
2. a right (legal entitlement) in some contexts
  - Étudier le droit = to study law
  - les droits de l’homme = human rights

In your sentence:

la loi (the law) protects
la justice et l’égalité (justice and equality as values).

Can I say Je trouve qu’il est important que la loi protège la justice et l’égalité pour tout le monde instead? Is that more natural?

Yes, that sentence is perfectly correct and very natural:

Je trouve qu’il est important que la loi protège la justice et l’égalité pour tout le monde.

Compared with Je trouve important que…, it sounds a bit more explicit and maybe a bit less formal. Both are fine in spoken and written French.

Can I say Je trouve important de protéger la justice et l’égalité? What’s the difference with Je trouve important que…?

Yes, you can say:

Je trouve important de protéger la justice et l’égalité.

Difference:

Je trouve important de + infinitive is used when the subject is the same as in the main clause, or when the subject is general:
- Je trouve important de protéger…
  = I think it’s important to protect… (implied subject: people in general / we / I)
Je trouve important que + subjunctive is used when there is a specific subject in the subordinate clause:
- Je trouve important que la loi protège…
  = I think it’s important that the law protects…

So:

de + infinitive → general or same subject
que + subjunctive → different, explicit subject (la loi here).

Can I drop que and say Je trouve important la loi protège la justice…?

No. In this structure que is obligatory.

The pattern is:

trouver + adj. + que + clause
→ Je trouve important que la loi protège…

Without que, the sentence is ungrammatical in French. You need que to introduce the subordinate clause whose truth you’re judging.

Is there any nuance difference between Je trouve important que la loi protège… and Je pense que la loi doit protéger…?

Yes, there is a slight nuance:

Je trouve important que la loi protège…
→ expresses a value judgment about the situation; it focuses on the importance of the law’s role.
Je pense que la loi doit protéger…
→ expresses a straight opinion and introduces obligation with doit (must / should). It suggests what the law ought to do, not just that it’s important.

Both convey a similar idea, but the angle is different: “this is important” vs. “this should/must happen.”