You don't need all these words. You should edit fundamentally, not superficially. Go through the draft word by word. Every word not doing work must go. Every sentence should then be rewritten to use fewer words and simpler grammar. What is here could be reduced by half without loss.

You need to clear up a technical confusion: this has nothing whatever to do with Carpenter. The cell tower data produced in Carpenter is very imprecise: it says what radio cell the p[hone was in. The data available on the private which you are discussing is GPS data, therefore accurate to 15m, compiled from applications running in smartassphones that have been given permission by users to access the smartassphone's internal location sensors.

That would affect the Fourth Amendment analysis, perhaps, where the location information introduced in evidence in a criminal prosecution. But that's unlikely to happen. The purchase of this data is intended to support investigations by finding people. If the person is found, how they were located is unlikely to be a matter of evidentiary interest in any eventual action, which might not be a criminal prosecution. So in order to show that there is a fourth amendment problem you need the real world to oblige, and it hasn't, nor is it likely to. Relying on the Wall Street Journal for your legal analysis isn't a good idea. They wrote a couple of stories based on some tasty leaks from the IGs of the two agencies, probably the result of some internal politics, but they did not locate a constitutional issue: those leaks seem intended to get Congressional interest.