I'm of the belief that a case involving open carry is a necessity for the purpose of "defense in depth", as it were. Which is to say, it should come behind other cases that could get us concealed carry as a protected method of carry, but it should nevertheless be there in case those cases are passed upon, as a hedge with respect to the possibility (however unlikely) that the Court regards open carry as the most protected means of carry.
If the Court passes on that, too, then it means that the Court is not interested in protecting carry in public at all, and that would render the 2nd Amendment essentially nonexistent.
|