This may be a flimsy theory but I was just thinking, what if "standing" is just a red herring?
Is it possible that due to the influence of a foreign power in this case, the issue isn't that the plaintiffs in the case lack standing, but that the courts themselves lack jurisdiction?
Q always said the military was the only way--is it possible that military courts are the only way too when election fraud involves foreign actors?
I think more likely many judges, through discussion or deduction, figured it out. Contrary to popular belief there are good judges out there. Just like us they have to wait for their time to do what they can do to help out the situation. Didn't you notice that there were a couple judge that said that the cases had Merit but they couldn't do anything about it? The best thing that they could do within their realm of power was to deny/dismiss the case instead of sit on it for weeks, so that it could move quickly up the chain.
Doubtful, that would break all kinds of legal restrictions on judiciary independence. To be fully legal...especially in the eyes of the public...the plaintiff must prove its case. The judge cannot collaborate with them behind the scenes.
Now, if the military is skipping legal avenues and is doing a full-on coup, then all bets are off and who cares about even running anything by the judiciary?