Woollard is arguing for elimination of Good & Substantial in the statute. The statute referenced is for the permit, but the statute does not state Open v Concealed.
Woollard (and SAF/Gura) only have to 1) Get the State to argue the complaint, 2) Stick to their guns that the 2A is incorporated fully, which contains the language 'keep and bear', 3) Resist/fight the "in the home" challenges that will come when they decide to fight vs duck/cover.
Woollard will not change the law.
The case is about the MSP recognizing "Self Defense" as a good and substantial reason.