I mean the ones still in Chicago. Professor Volokh points to a decision from a federal judge ruling that Chicago's ban on granting a license to have a gun in your home to people convicted of non-violent misdemeanors is void for vagueness and unconstitutional. In this case, the misdemeanor was possession of a firearm in his home without the necessary license.
Actually, possession of a firearm without a license was originally a felony when this guy was convicted in 1995, but the state courts later concluded that this violated a state requirement concerning single subjects for legislative bills, and reduced all of these felonies to misdemeanors. But even then, Chicago still wouldn't let this guy have a license to have a gun in his home.
There's a legitimate distinction from a constitutional standpoint between felonies and misdemeanors, and arguably a distinction that might limit the rights of those convicted of violent misdemeanors. But the only crime here was that the defendant owned a gun in his home, and didn't get the right paperwork for it.