And you wonder why everyone calls you ignorant.
The article you reproduced (without attribution - one small step shy of plagiarism) is riddled with inaccuracies.
First, the vote; Justice Kennedy's retirement was effective July 31st.of this year. There therefor cannot be nine votes on a decision.
Second, the decision. A lower court found the districts were illegally drawn to the advantage of the Repugnicans who drew it. The SC decision does not, repeat, NOT, vacate that decision. It merely states that there is not enough time before the election to complete a redrawing in a legal and orderly fashion.
Third, the law. There is no law against gerrymandering. The finding is that the equal protection clause of the Constitution is violated when classes of people (such as Democrats) are given circumstances in which their vote carries less weight than some other group.
Even more scurrilous, the logic of the article suggests the law applies to Democrats, but not to Repugnicans. If you "think" that's as it should be, you're anti-democracy, to say nothing of unspeakably obtuse. Again, the court did not strike down the appellate court finding that the districts were illegally drawn.
Trumpies are astounding. They have no redeeming qualities, no souls, no hearts, no brains, no education, no clue, yet they don't wink out of existence. Eventually though, Darwin will out.