This is a question where standing is like 90% of the actual merits of the case. To have standing in this kind of case, the plaintiffs have to demonstrate trace

This is a question where standing is like 90% of the actual merits of the case. To have standing in this kind of case, the plaintiffs have to demonstrate traceability of their repercussions to the government's actions through a third party. The underlying merits is whether or not the government is trying to enforce repercussions via third parties. If the government is doing so, then definitionally, someone is going to have their repercussions traceable to government action, and therefore someone has standing to object to it. But if nobody has traceable actions, then the government has kind of by definition did no wrong.