It's been about 9 months since the SCOTUS ruling.
We have seen some success like:
HI's CCW issuance
CA Handgun roster (I'm sure CA will appeal to the most anti 2a circuit. The 9th circuit has never made a favorable 2a ruling)
Certain CA counties CCW issuance (San Jose is taking like a year to do their interview, but prior to Bruen it wouldn't matter and denials were issued).
SCOTUS warning NY judges to rule correctly
IL assault weapons ban (injunction issued, still has to go to trial) There were like 12 pages of plaintiffs.
IL state asked judge for more time for their sensitive places lawsuit and judge said no
And we have seen an anti 2a judge sort of still not abide. I'm sure there are are a few more, but I can't remember off the top of my head.
DE assault weapons and "high cap" mag (injunction denied, still has to go to trial). This is the most recent as of yesterday. Judge accepted the states argument that since the Bowie knife was banned in 29 states, "assault rifles" can be banned as well. And the AWB ban doesn't take away the 2a right since handguns can still be owned. Also assault pistol injunction denied because the plaintiff failed to state how many assault pistols are in common use.
Also for the mags, judge used the logic that the interest of public safety outweighs the mags, even though this violates what SCOTUS said to use when making a ruling.
Most of the above still will have hearings or additional hearings due to appeal. Then add in NJ, NY, CA counties sensitive places laws and soon to be HI law will make their way up the court ladder.
HI's attitude about Bruen is F-U, sue us. They are re-doing the handgun class requirement to purchase, which has nothing to do with CCW. HI is sending a message.