The Second Circuit declines to find its precedent in In re Application of the United States for an Order Directing a Provider of Electronic Communication Service to Disclose Records to the Government was still binding. Looking at the issue anew and in detail, it still concludes that CSLI information is not protected by the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Martinez, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12146 (2d Cir. July 7, 2017):
Accordingly, Goldstein’s readings of Jones and Riley do not persuade us to reconsider our own precedent, nor do we see any independent reason to do so. While the rapidly evolving nature of CSLI may one day give us a reason to reconsider the distinction between GPS and CSLI, we decline to do so today. We continue to adhere to our view of In re Application: the Fourth Amendment is not violated when the government has shown “reasonable grounds to believe that the … records … are relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.” [18 U.S.C. § 2703(d)].