There is nothing in the canons (that is, official pronouncements) of Nicaea II that specifically affirms the canons of Carthage. The Council’s acceptance of the Carthaginian canon was done as a “side-bar” issue, and we only know about it because Byzantine clerics speak about it in their correspondences as an issue that was settled at the Council. The closest statement made to this effect by the Council itself in its Acts is the proclamation from its first canon
Of Eastern Orthodox importance particularly as they consider Trullo as ecumenical:
The collection of the code of canons of The African church from the 419 synod was accepted by the Council of Trullo, the canons of which received a quasi-ecumenical authority from the subsequent general imprimatur given them by the Seventh Ecumenical Council, the Second of Nicaea.
At the time, the Byzantines considered the 692 Council of Trullo (a.k.a. the Quinisext Council) to be Ecumenical and binding on the Eastern Church/Empire, even though Rome refused to ratify it as a matter of universal authority. Yet, while Trullo was still subject to debate at this time, it clearly fell under the criteria of a council that was "locally assembled for promulgating the decrees of Ecumenical councils.” As the first canon of Nicaea II stipulated. This cannot be denied. At the 692 Byzantine council of Trullo, the African Code of the 419 Council of Carthage (that is, the assembled canons of the Carthagian councils) was embraced by the Byzantine church.
Of a final note: The council of Carthage held in 418 was a great synod (Augustine of Hippo called it A Council of Africa), which assembled under the presidency of Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, took action concerning the errors of Caelestius, a disciple of Pelagius, and it denounced the Pelagian doctrines of human nature, original sin, grace, and perfectibility; and it fully approved the contrary views of Augustine.
This council and its condemnations were ratified at the 4th was ecumenical Council of Ephesus in 431
Outright pelagiamism had been successfully condemned in the west on numerous occasions.The question at hand was whether a moderate form of Pelagianism (later dubbed semi-pelagianism) could be affirmed, or if the doctrines of Augustine were to be affirmed.
It defined that faith, though a free act, resulted even in its beginnings from the grace of God, enlightening the human mind and enabling belief. This is a complete rebuttal of semi-pelagianism and St John cassians thought.This became the de facto position of the western church and nobody in west or east disputed the decisions of this synod. All but especially in the west held it’s decisions as de facto faith on original sin and grace.