The US has no jurisdiction over underwater cables—promoting one person doesn’t change that

Jason Petty, "How Hackers of Submarine Cables May Be Held Liable Under the Law of the Sea," Chicago Journal of International law 6-22-2021, https://cjil.uchicago.edu/print-archive/how-hackers-submarine-cables-may-be-held-liable-under-law-sea-- 嘉玮

UNCLOS provides similar protections for submarine cables in the EEZ as in territorial waters, though jurisdiction is less clear. Again, similar to territorial waters, while states are required to “adopt the laws and regulations necessary to provide that the breaking or injury by a ship flying its flag or by a person subject to its jurisdiction of a submarine cable beneath the high seas done willfully or through culpable negligence… be a punishable offense,”78 most states have not done so.79 Unlike territorial waters, however, coastal states’ regulations in the EEZ or the continental shelf do not apply to foreign nationals who intentionally break or damage cables.80 This means states in the EEZ and the continental shelf can only hold their own citizens that injure cables liable under their domestic laws. While some states have made novel legal arguments about submarine cables as being in a protected zone of exploitation,81 the majority of states accept domestic jurisdiction does not extend to cables in the EEZ.82 In the instance of hacking, this would mean coastal states could only address domestic hackers, which, while potentially useful for private actors, does not likely apply to the majority of hacking incidents, which are largely committed by foreign governments