This chapter traces state and non-state actors’ engagement with the UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). It demonstrates that engagement with CEDAW triggered debate over family law, led to institutional change, and encouraged states to reform their respective laws. All family law reforms that were initiated after independence occurred after acceding to CEDAW. However, the outcome of these reforms, such as the 2010 Jordanian family law, is often in violation of CEDAW. CEDAW documents demonstrate that the Moroccan and Jordanian governments articulate opinions that considerably overlap with the positions of socially conservative actors like Islamists. Portraying family law reform as a conflict between Islamists and ostensibly progressive state elites is therefore too simplistic. Moreover, the increasing representation of social-conservatives on the international level suggests that a mechanism designed to advance gender equality might help opposition to coordinate and mobilize against this very same goal. In Morocco, in contrast to Jordan, opposition to CEDAW was better managed from above with no state institution publically opposing the convention. This seems to suggest that international law enjoys greater political support in Morocco than in Jordan and that religious institutions enjoy more autonomy in Jordan than in Morocco.