The issue is how specifically you want to talk about logical positivism in the modern context. When I talk about it in the modern context, I don't mean a group of philosophers who hew to the precise line sketched out by the Vienna Circle and their supporters. I refer instead to a strain of thought that views logical positivism sympathetically. The idea isn't that they think the verification criterion of meaning is the end of the story and bulletproof, but rather that the critiques of it and the systems offered in place of them are not as convincing as was once thought. So the idea isn't so much that they're logical positivists through and through, but rather that they have sympathies towards the logical positivists and their project and have doubts about the critiques of their opponents. It's about a sort of reevaluation of the work of the logical positivists rather than a wholesale adoption of their ideas.

This is why I say "discredited" is a bit harsh, because while the view was once seen as entirely discredited, people have been reevaluating just how discredited it was. I'd also point out that this is a trend among younger philosophers (where younger means younger than 50, which, wow, weird to say).