Should the third-party doctrine be overruled as inconsistent with Katz v. United States?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Police identified William Mixton as the user of an instant-messaging account through the issuance of two administrative subpoenas, both of which involved searches of private information without judicial approval. A slender majority of the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed, determining that the exception to the third-party doctrine in Carpenter v. United States, 1388. Ct. 2206 (2018), was limited to cell site location information and did not create a reasonable expectation of privacy in his IP address or subscriber information. The questions presented are: Should this Court overrule the third-party doctrine as stated in Miller and Smith as being inconsistent with a reasonable expectation of privacy under Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)? Alternatively, should this Court find that the third-party doctrine is inconsistent with the Fourth Amendment and adopt the Positive Law Model as described in Justice Gorsuch’s dissenting opinion in Carpenter? 1