And the USSC would use that wrong decision and other wrong decisions by all the other lower federal courts to make their decision -- which would also be wrong. Too late, amigo. It's then settled law. You got your wish, though.
"But more importantly, they just DROPPED the whole part about KEEPING arms"
They devoted very few words to it -- maybe one paragraph in 80 pages of dicta. They simply combined "keep" with "bear", saying it was similar to "necessary" and "proper".
"So in order to keep from infringing on our right to keep arms, they're going to have to infringe on our right to keep arms."
So in order to keep from infringing on our right to keep arms as part of a militia, they're going to have to infringe on our individual right to keep arms. Yep. You got it. That's exactly how the USSC would read it, based on past lower court rulings.
The law has protected our right to keep and bear arms for centuries, yet they would happily abandon the law for judicial fiat, which they delusionally imagine would mirror their convictions. Their personal will is the only thing they hold important; representative government and the rule of law be damned.