Neither was a good case. Both petitioners are low-level CRIMINALS.

The case that goes up has to involve a law-abiding person(s) who either can't apply (Illinois) or is arbitrarily denied (NYC or Mass). That has been the winning strategy so far.

Miranda was a criminal. Think again. We are in some serious trouble right now folks. A BOATLOAD of bad case law is being made in federal district court lately - viz. Lane v Holder, Peruta v San Diego Cty., Peterson v LaCabe, Kachalsky v Cacace, Richards v Prieto and others. With the exception of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals (in Ezell) federal judges are nullifying Heller and McDonald. We'll see what happens as Nordyke goes en banc, again, but prospects are not good. We need 3+ more wins with the supes and soon. At a minimum we need to get the federal district courts to recognize carry ("bear") and get clear definition of what Heller created with so-called "sensitive areas" and arms in
common use." Otherwise, we're going end up with second class 2nd Amendment rights.

. We are in some serious trouble right now folks.

Speaking as one of the civil cases in the district court you specifically named as "creating bad case law", no, we are not in serious trouble....

Miranda was a criminal. Think again

5th amendment deals mostly with criminal procedure rights. 2nd amendment has nothing to do with criminal procedure.