Gator pointed out the 2nd District ruling, so I won't. I'm going to talk about why that ruling was made.

The phrase, "the people", is also used in the 1st, 9th and 10th Amendments, and either the 4th or 5th, I misremember. It has been the interpretation of these Amendments for over 200 years that the rights reserved for "the people" are individual rights. The theory of it being a "group right" rather than an individual right for decades, and it has been struck down every time. And when you read the writings of the men who wrote that document indicated that surely was their intent, even if it's full effect was beyond what they could see through their own prejudices against everyone who wasn't white, christian, male and of means. Instead, they have been hoisted on their own petards by their own words.

Or did the writers of the Bill of Rights make a foot note that the 2nd Amendment is the only exception to this doctrine, and only the ancestors of the current crop of those who oppose the human right to self defense were clued in this and kept it a secret for 170 years? For some reason, I just can't believe that. Neither could the judges who made that ruling. They upheld that the right to self defense, unarmed or armed, is an individual right protected by the Second Amendment, and as such no state may take steps to limit it by legislation or deny the means of self-defense to any of it's people unless they have either committed a wrong against society or are mentally or physically unwell to the point that they can no longer legal exercise their right and responsibilities as a citizen.

There was another, similar ruling back in the late 19th century. Back then, in parts of the South, a black man couldn't own a gun. But at that time, a bunch of rich old white men, including one from the South, confirmed that a poor, black ex-slave could own a gun, and in particular, not only as a hunting tool but also as a means of self defense. That was based not only on the 2nd Ammendment but also the 14th.

I actually expect that ruling to be used a grounds to challenge restrictive and discriminatory laws and practices concerning concealed carry over the next two or three years. You might not always like it, but the Constitution is the Highest Law of this land.