“If the States don’t have standing, who does? Is SCOTUS saying the feds are omnipotent?”
Read Justice Thomas’ concurring opinion for an explanation.
Agreed. If I'm reading it correctly, Thomas said the states didn't say how reversing Biden's policies would remove the financial harm done to the states: "To establish standing to sue in federal court, a plaintiff must show that it has suffered a concrete and particularized injury, one that is both traceable to the defendant and redressable by a court order."
I believe "rederessable" is legal-eeze for: if the Fed quit acting like a butt then the financial pain experienced by the states would go away". In other words, it may have harmed the states' position if the states told the court things like "The harm the Biden is doing to us is irreparable". That might sound convincing to you and me, but in SCOTUS-legal-lingo it might be a case-killer to say that undoing the Fed's policy will not automatically ease the pain.