Personally, the Federal Bar was an embarrassment to begin with, Standing issues only seem to come up when it is the Right that has a problem with it. I never hear about Standing being a problem when the Left goes to court. How rare is it when an Abortion, Environmental, or Civil Rights case is dismissed for Standing? It is amazing what a Lawyer can torture out of a very simple document and it has become a self-repeating process as those same lawyers become Judges or Senators.
There are a number of high profile environut cases that were tossed by the Supreme Court based on standing.
For the most part, standing works as a key to the courthouse door to prevent interlopers from profiting from situations in which they have no personal stake in the outcome that is distinct from the public at large. Standing, however, is sometimes imperfectly applied; and in those cases when the district court judge makes a mistake, the appropriate response is not to call the judge a traitor or threaten more lawsuits, but to take an appeal.
FYI -- Environmental cases are rarely dismissed for lack of standing because Congress has written provisions into many of the environmental laws that grant standing to just about anyone to enforce the particular environmental law or regulation. Abortionists generally have standing to challenge laws that restrict abortion because they are in the business of performing abortions and have a direct stake in the outcome of the case. Civil Rights cases rely upon organizations like the ACLU that hunt for the perfect plaintiff that has a direct and personal interest in the outcome of the litigation.
If you want to give specific examples of cases where the court, in your opinion, improperly granted or denied standing, I will do my best to explain why. But discussing the concept of standing in the abstract is a losing battle.