More details to follow, I suppose. It will be a good indication of the new court court composition's interest in defining the 2A and Heller.
NYSRPA v. Corlett
https://d3uwh8jpzww49g.cloudfront.net/s ... -final.pdfQUESTION PRESENTED
New York prohibits its ordinary law-abiding
citizens from carrying a handgun outside the home
without a license, and it denies licenses to every
citizen who fails to convince the state that he or she
has “proper cause” to carry a firearm. In District of
Columbia v. Heller, this Court held that the Second
Amendment protects “the individual right to possess
and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” 554 U.S.
570, 592 (2008), and in McDonald v. City of Chicago,
the Court held that this right “is fully applicable to the
States,” 561 U.S. 742, 750 (2010). For more than a
decade since then, numerous courts of appeals have
squarely divided on this critical question: whether the
Second Amendment allows the government to deprive
ordinary law-abiding citizens of the right to possess
and carry a handgun outside the home. This circuit
split is open and acknowledged, and it is squarely
presented by this petition, in which the Second Circuit
affirmed the constitutionality of a New York regime
that prohibits law-abiding individuals from carrying a
handgun unless they first demonstrate some form of
“proper cause” that distinguishes them from the body
of “the people” protected by the Second Amendment.
The time has come for this Court to resolve this critical
constitutional impasse and reaffirm the citizens’
fundamental right to carry a handgun for self-defense.
The question presented is:
Whether the Second Amendment allows the
government to prohibit ordinary law-abiding citizens
from carrying handguns outside the home for self defense.