There needs to be a law that if a suit is dismissed as “no standing”, the judge must declare WHO DOES have standing.
Also, if a case is dismissed as inappropriate in this court, the judge must state where the case should have been held.
The “standing” issues addressed by the judge appear to be more about the claims being made by PDJT (or his lawyers) rather than who he is.
Again, the ruling is here: (I’m only about 1/3 of the way through it).
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.610157/gov.uscourts.flsd.610157.267.0.pdf
In other words, the judge is saying that the arguments being made don’t fit the statutes he’s litigating under.
Which means—according to this judge—location doesn’t matter either.
He’s saying that the arguments in the case don’t belong in any court of law.