I think you’re being a little disingenuous, but maybe unintentionally.

The Supreme Court “hasn’t said” by allowing the Ninth Circuit ruling to stand. The Supreme Court’s denial of review is not an endorsement of a lower court’s ruling

The Supreme Court's denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari is sometimes misunderstood as implying that the Supreme Court approves the decision of the lower court.

However, as the Court explained in Missouri v. Jenkins, such a denial "imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case”. In particular, a denial of a writ of certiorari means that no binding precedent is created by the denial itself, and the lower court's decision is treated as mandatory authority only within the geographical (or in the case of the Federal Circuit, subject-specific) jurisdiction of that court.

The reasons for why a denial of certiorari cannot be treated as implicit approval were set forth in Maryland v. Baltimore Radio Show, Inc. (1950), in which the Court explained the many rationales which could underlie the denial of a writ which have nothing to do with the merits of the case.

It’s ok to feel strongly about something, but your argument may be stronger if you didn’t take emotional shortcuts to get where you want to go.