Cell-site location data is collected by cell phone companies incidentally but inseparably as a side-effect of using the phone. And using a phone is no longer seen as an optional device to carry around.

The Alexa recordings are collected as a primary function of the device purchased and setup at the whim of the owner specifically for the purpose of capturing audio in their own home for advanced processing and analysis by a third party.

The precedent you cite is unfortunately not going to protect this data, in my opinion, because the specific rationale the Supreme Court used to start requiring a warrant for cell site data are perfectly avoided in this case.

As for the NSA doing things that are illegal or “pointless for their institutional mission”, which also happen to massively infringe on basic human privacy rights,... it would seem from recent history that that is exactly what they are most likely to do.

I agree that the SCOTUS case cited is not in itself the fatal blow against third party doctrine. But it's a major step in the courts recognizing that pre-digital doctrines need adaptations/concessions to apply to a digital society. Again, IANAL, but if the third party doctrine includes Alexa requests, then why have police (at least in other jurisdictions) needed search warrants to get account info and content and emails from Facebook/Google? [0] Though I'm probably naive in hoping that there's a conclusive distinction; the third party doctrine would seemingly apply for the U.S. mail, but doesn't seem to.

I definitely didn't mean to imply that the NSA is above doing illegal activities. But it seems self-evident that people were very surprised by the Snowden revelations, enough to demand reforms [1] (or at least "gestures", if we want to be cynical). And people would be just as surprised to find out the NSA doing something far more invasive today. Laws and regulations don't mean that illegal activity will cease to exist -- but it makes such activity much more difficult/cumbersome to do, especially on such a wide-scale, without the conspiratorial buy-in from agency managers, leaders, and high-ranking legislators. So I'm not surprised that the NSA has the capability to do massive 1984-like domestic surveillance, but I would be surprised that such a program was approved and implemented. The laws/regulations on paper are what make it possible for anyone to get punished when someone like Snowden whistleblows.

[0] https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/shootings/unsealed-docum...

[1] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/how-the-nsa-spyin...

You would think that but you'd be surprised to learn from snowden's leaks that the NSA does "waste time" and resources with a lot of this type of surveillance. We had to pass a new surveillance law just to get the NSA (and FBI) to stop pretending that it needs collect 3-hop phone records (millions) for single investigation and now we allow the to collect "only" 2-hop records (tens of thousands) in one investigation.

The NSA also does a lot of interception for World of Warcraft chats and other stuff like that. And the new FISA law allows 17 agencies (including DEA, IRS, SEC, ETC) to gain access and analyze raw internet data that passed unencrypted through internet cables. Oh and they don't need a warrant to do that either (very likely unconstitutional but still "legal" at the moment). They only need the warrant for the cherry picked data they intend to use in court. And of course we all know the damage against many innocents will already be done by then.