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?
In the case of treason or foreign powers bear in mind that different evidence - gathered through military intelligence - may be used in tribunals but is usually not permissible in civil courts since it is gathered in a manner different than civil courts.
So, for example, if MILINT did in fact monitor the packets transferring back and forth between countries on the elections, they can use that in a tribunal but could not in civil court because of the method of intelligence gathering.
As Q had said many times, how do you introduce evidence. I believe this is one of the methods Q was referring to.