The Epilogue examines how authoritarian regimes manage dual state structures through comparisons with Russia, Egypt, Singapore, and Poland. It argues that sustaining judicial autonomy in routine cases requires two core capacities: disciplining prerogative actors and dejudicializing politically sensitive disputes. These conditions are more readily met in centralized regimes like Singapore, whereas larger or fragmented systems such as Russia and Egypt face persistent informal interference and, at times, prerogative takeover. Poland illustrates how dualism can unravel under democratic backsliding, as courts become contested arenas between regime and opposition. Across cases, the viability of dual states hinges not on liberal pluralism but on hierarchical control that insulates courts from destabilizing pressures while preserving regime authority. The dual state thus emerges as a replicable model of authoritarian legality – one sustained not by institutional restraint but by centralized coercion.