Another way to reframe this is that you would get a higher resolution looking at an object 100 miles down from space then you'd get looking at an equivalent object 100 miles up.
(Keyhole satellites are at 200 miles.)
Of course, knowing when satellites are above you is a bit easier to know and prepare for (the governments usually know where sophisticated adversarial satellites are). The smaller satellites I think are quite a bit higher - 300 miles - so the balloon can probably beat them provided it can get with 100 miles (even though there's a lot of those).
We've been at the limit since the 70's, btw. The Hubble space telescope was enabled by the spy satellite program - they didn't just "happen" to have an extra mirror of exactly the right size, they made them for spy satellites.
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2019/09/us-spy-satellites-at-d...
Two things. It will be significantly better at ELINT, soaking up signals over which it floats. Second, at 60,000 feet it is at least an order of magnitude closer than LEO spy satellites are, if not more. Simple physics dictates the limits of resolution for the lenses for spy satellites. Being significantly closer makes it much easier to provide better images than a multi billion dollar spy satellite. All at a significantly lower cost.