What precedent are they going to set? I think many agree that the outcome is wrong, but what do you want SCOTUS to change? While I agree that conceptually the CA microstamping case should have been open and shut, the reasoning in the petition dances around the issue. They never really explained WHY the lower court got it wrong and what needs to be done instead.
In Rogers for example a bad decision could have solidified that the government can arbitrarily decide who has the right to exercise a right (may-issue), or even worse solidify that keep and bear do not extend outside of the home. Though all that still remains in limbo now, sometimes living to fight another day (in a better court composition) is better than risking bad precedent which would further entrench the infringements and embolden the lower courts.
Keeping the Senate and the WH could not be more important.