semi-related

While I cannot say I know the state reporting laws with all due precision...

1) The USA does not accept compulsory jurisdiction from any international court.

2) Even if it did federally, the states aren't party to the instruments setting up the courts, so it is a valid argument (and HAS been used before) that state laws aren't subject to that jurisdiction either. This argument, of course, has been greatly undermined by all the internal legal changes that have progressively given more power to the federal government but can still stick at times - and unless I am seeing the specific case, I cannot really predict how it'd go.

2.5) In essence, I do not think it's a bad thing that US state laws aren't subject to international jurisdiction; even if I do think many of them have no place even existing...