The chapter scrutinizes efforts undertaken by the state (creation of new institutions) to guarantee a better application of the 2004 Moroccan family law. Initially celebrating Morocco’s 2004 family law as a societal revolution, a decade later women’s groups had become dismayed by the persistence of minor marriage, polygyny, and marriage guardianship. Conventional explanations for why statutory law reform often fails to produce intended outcomes depart from the concept of the homogeneous state, pointing to insufficient enforcement mechanisms and cultural resistance to the new law within society. Arguing against this conceptualization, this chapter adopts the state-in-society approach. It compares how two types of street-level bureaucrats and secular and Islamist women’s groups have engaged with the 2004 law. It finds that different groups have emphasized and rejected different categories and norms of the law. These different interpretations are facilitated by the law’s ambiguity. Street-level bureaucrats’ interpretations have sometimes overlapped with those of civil-society actors. The state is therefore not enforcing one normative order against cultural resistance from society. Instead, different state actors are themselves actively involved in the production and preservation of multiple normativities. This chapter focuses solely on Morocco, because Jordan did not introduce new institutions to guarantee a better application of the family law.