Yeah, I wasn't clear as to my reasoning: if you read the filing, they go out of their way to refuse the disclose the underlying plaintiffs' identities and speci

Yeah, I wasn't clear as to my reasoning: if you read the filing, they go out of their way to refuse the disclose the underlying plaintiffs' identities and specifics of alleged harm, so filing under associational standing is a gambit to evade FRCP 10(a) and hide plaintiffs' identities for (IMO) improper reasons -- embarrassment and economic harm are not sufficient reasons to allow pseudonymous filings, but they'd have trouble finding sympathetic plaintiffs who are willing to publicly associate themselves with this case.