It's the old, "[The justice] has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"

> I would imagine the same playbook will be used in Alabama, Louisiana, and New York as there is no penalty for it.

It's worth noting that what's going on in New York is different from what's going on in the Southern states. In the Southern states, there is the issue with racial segregation that has been described previously. In New York, there has been a recent state supreme court change which will likely negate a previous ruling that forced New York to draw a relatively impartial map instead of the severe gerrymander they wanted to draw. In all likelihood, New York will switch from the impartial map to a severely gerrymandered one by the next election.

All of the these decisions, if implemented, would likely benefit Democrats in the next election. A number of red states are having their severely gerrymandered maps thrown out, which will force them to draw slightly less severely gerrymandered maps which will likely result in an extra Democratic district or two in each state affected. Meanwhile, in New York a fairly impartial map (though still leaning Democratic due to the make-up of the state) will turn into a severe Democratic gerrymander, likely helping the Democrats pick up 4-5 seats in the next election.

It's a big story because of how close the representation of the House of Representatives is in this session. Suffice it to say that if the maps that will likely be put in place due to these rulings were in place in 2022, Democrats would have won an extremely narrow majority.

Edited