Nope. The U.S. Supreme Court could have ruled that the tax was unconstitutional because it was an infringement on the right to keep and bear a shotgun -- without saying who would do the keeping and bearing.
Taxes on products have been ruled unconstitutional without the court identifying who is affected.
You just don't get it do you?
There can be no ruling unless both parties have standing.
Miller was asserting a violation of his second amendment rights as in individual.
The courts did not dismiss the case for lack of standing, which it would have had to do if the Miller could not assert a violation of his rights as an individual.
The court did not dismiss the case, nor did the government move to dismiss the case for lack of standing on Miller's part, and proceeded to rule on the merits of the case. Therefore Miller had standing, i.e. could assert a violation of his (individual) second amendment rights.
Therefore the Miller case, among other things, stands for the fact that the second amendment is an individual right, not a collective one.
If you cannot understand this very basic principle of law, it is useless to discuss this with you.
Good day.