Just the opposite. They had standing based on the actions that already happened
Citing threats of legal action by Driehaus's counsel, the company that owned the billboard space refused to put up the ad. Driehaus filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission alleging that SBA List violated Ohio's campaign laws by making false statements about his voting record. SBA List filed an action in federal district court arguing that the Ohio statutes infringed upon its rights to free speech and association under the First Amendment.
In the website case, the woman wasn't making websites. And there would be no enforcement until she went into the business (if ever) and someone (if ever) requested a website she objected to.
That's why this case was purely hypothetical.
You are just being obtuse. The part of the case you bolded does not say that you have to have enforcement to have standing. The Supreme Court cited its own case law. The 10th Circuit found she had standing; the SCOTUS fond she had standing.