Newdow standing down

I observed in an earlier post that Michael Newdow was having more success with his Pledge of Allegiance case than his child custody case. The Supreme Court, however, saw these cases as intertwined; they decided that Newdow did not have standing to bring a case on behalf of his daughter, and threw out the argument 8-0.

Couldn't they have figured this out before all the hype and preparation, which culminated in a presentation before the Court that observers called, "dazzling?" Did they have to wait to hear Newdow's argument before they decided it couldn't be made?

Eugene Volokh and Jacob T. Levy have also weighed in. But any comment (other than that old standby, "feh") seems to be treating the decision with more care and thought than the Court has demonstrated.