The problem is Miller v. US. It was never settled because the vic died, but many gun grabbers, Fienstien in particular, cite it as proving the RKBA is a collective right. Us gun lovers really want this to be heard before SCOTUS, but would like to see some of the libs off the court before this happens. This is why elections matter.
At worst, Miller stands for the proposition that only keeping and bearing of militarily useful arms are protected by the second amendment.
The government argued that since Miller was not a member of any militia, his ownership of an NFA weapon (short barreled shotgun) was not protected by the second amendment). (You can read the government brief and other documents on the case at the NFA List site. The Court did not even acknowledge that argument, but only ruled that the lower court should not have taken "judicial notice" that the weapon in question, a short barreled shotgun "could" be used in a military or militia context. (They'd be great in CCB, and single barrel, or double barrel shotguns had been used by the military in the days before the introduction of repeating shotguns) without taking evidence to that effect.
It's a terrible case for setting any precedent, since only one size argued before the court, the government of course. It's also faulty in it's citation and interpretation of the (state court) cases it relied on for a certain amount of precedence.
The only way these cases would be heard is if the Feds passed total prohobition.