This paper examines the relationship between the Sharia and the political authorities through a focus on the muhtasib, an official who was as much a part of the legal landscape as the judge or mufti. Specifically, I study events involving the muhtasib, as recorded in the chronicles, in the cities of Cairo and neighboring Fustat during the Mamluk period (1250–1517). Best described as an inspector of public spaces, this legal official traversed the city carrying out his duty to command right and forbid wrong. The position of muhtasib was connected to legal doctrine and to the jurists, whose rules formed one source of guidance in the official’s work, while at the same time, the position was connected to the sultan, who appointed and dismissed the muhtasibs and also gave orders to them from time to time during their tenures. In terms of constitutional structure, these two sets of influences correspond to two fundamental concepts of authority: the authority of doctrine, associated with the jurists who formulated it, and the authority of policy-based decisions (siyasa), associated with the rulers. Modern studies have justifiably concluded that jurists and rulers recognized the mutual need for the other—their relationship was “symbiotic.” But this does not mean that they had clear jurisdictions that were well recognized—quite the contrary, they each sought to extend the reach of their own notion of law, even at the expense of the other when they disagreed. The muhtasib was influenced by both sources, sometimes in very immediate and tangible ways, allowing for a study of the dynamics between the rulers and jurists as prompted by actions involving the muhtasib, which could create a triangular relationship. I will show the dynamics of these jurisdictional struggles and in particular the extent to which both jurists and rulers took an interest in the full spectrum of social regulation. The sultan involved himself in topics that had elaborate doctrinal rules, and jurists concerned themselves with matters of broader social policy, each based on their own interests. As a result, inhabitants of Cairo and Fustat were governed by both sources in all aspects of public life.