This study, adopting Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse analysis approach, examines the legislative process in the field of family law during the 11th term of the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Parliament of Iran). The findings reveal that the political alignment of the parliament and the government under the conservative discourse exposed latent internal divisions within this political current, leading to the emergence of two sub-discourses in family law legislation: “traditional conservatism” and “reform-oriented conservatism.” The traditional conservative discourse, with the nodal point of “strengthening the family institution” and its articulation with moments such as Islam, traditional intra-family relations, disregard for women’s rights and…, employed hard-power tools to exclude its rival. It played a pivotal role in the ratification of Article 56 of the Family Protection and Youth Population Law and the suspension of the Bill on the Protection of Dignity and Security of Women Against Violence. In contrast, the reform-oriented conservative discourse, centered on “balancing the fulfillment of women’s rights and the consolidation of the family institution” and articulated with moments such as dynamic jurisprudence, women’s dignity within the family, motherhood, culture, expert consensus, and… used soft strategies to marginalize its rival discourse and to modify or halt certain bills.