44, 121 S.Ct. 2038 (Stevens, J., dissenting). Lower courts uniformly agree that, because of the third-party doctrine, computer users lack a reasonable expectation of privacy in their IP addresses, subscriber information, and similar descriptive information they disclose to third parties (such as ISPs) to facilitate Internet service. See, e.g., U.S. v. Carpenter, 819 F.3d 880, 887 (6th Cir. 2016) (internal citations omitted) (“The Fourth Amendment protects the content of the modern-day letter, the email. But courts have not (yet, at least) extended those protections to the internet analogue to envelope markings, namely the metadata used to route internet communications, like sender and recipient addresses on an email, or IP addresses.”); U.S. v. Weast, 811 F.3d 743, 748 (5th Cir. 2016) (<HOLDING>); U.S. v. Beckett, 369 Fed.Appx. 52, 56 (11th
holding that the fourth amendment does not protect a bahamian citizen with no substantial connections to the us holding that fourth amendment claims are not cognizable on habeas review because the fourth amendment exclusionary rule does not relate to the accuracy of the factfinding process holding that the first amendment does not protect true threats against the president holding that the fourth amendment does not protect ip addresses or peertopeer shared files holding first amendment does not protect nonexpressive conduct