From what I gather, scientific laws according to Humeans are merely descriptions of the regularities that occur in nature. Anti Humeans think laws have some sort of prescriptive/causal power which leads to the familiar notion of things “obeying” laws.
Does this mean that on the Humean view, the regularities themselves are simply coincidences? After all, it is easy to imagine a universe where gravity works differently here vs. there. It is also easy to imagine gravity or many other forces working differently now vs. later. If laws are prescriptive, it gives us an explanation for why gravity works the same way here vs. there. If they are not, should one have to accept that this is a miracle?
From another question on here earlier, and most comments on this site, it seemed that Humeanism was the prevailing view with regards to laws. But according to the recent PhilPapers survey here, most philosophers actually seem to be anti Humean.