On the contrary, if one were to look at cases cited as "activist" given the magnitude and impact of this case at the time it is not listed as one by the legal scholars then and now.

Even assuming for the sake of argument one were to characterize this as an "activist decision" the current Supreme Court 4-4 split on fed v/s state's rights would maintain the status quo. When the current nominee is sworn in the numbers would again favor a 5-4 split leaning towards the same State's rights logic outlined in Lopez, which would keep concealed laws regulated by the individual states rather than the Fed govt.
Especially when the case speaks directly to the carrying of handguns, "It held that while Congress had broad lawmaking authority under the Commerce Clause, the power was limited, and did not extend so far from "commerce" as to authorize the regulation of the carrying of handguns, especially when there was no evidence that carrying them affected the economy on a massive scale."