First off, from what I've heard about the "Miller case" United States v. Miller , 307, U.S., 174 (1939), before the SCOTUS, was that Miller was acting Pro Se, and did not have the money necessary to file any brief(s).
Remember this would have been a time when just copying cost(s) would have been thousands of dollar's, think "mimeograph machine(s)." See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimeograph.
I don't know if my thought's are correct (Apparently they are, just slightly different from what I stated above) Reference Miller having not responded to any of the filings @ the SCOTUS, but maybe some else can add some information.
From http://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=4742
5th (Fifth Paragraph) "Gordon Dean argued United States v. Miller et al. before the Supreme Court on March 30, 1939.
Defense counsel Gutensohn did not appear, sending a telegram to the Court on March 28, stating that his clients had been unable to pay him for his services."
No, I don't take your comments as an attack. I have in the past expended considerable energy refuting anti-Second Amendment postings by an ex-Freeper. The actual history of Second Amendment rulings is complicated enough.
I'm not sure that what I found online was a definitive source for either the Miller ruling or the syllabus. I'm sure it is online somewhere. I just don't recall any real justification for the misreadings of Miller perpetrated by anti-gun Appeals Courts.
Your comment would stand as justification for the misbehavior of those Appeals Courts and I wouldn't want to give them or their supporters the satisfaction of having anyone unjustifiably believe them.