Must Read: Justice Scalia’s Brutally Honest Dissent on Supreme Court Ruling

By: Laura Meyers

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia held nothing back in his brutally honest dissent this morning against his colleagues on the bench ruling 6-3 to uphold Obamacare subsidies.

Someone had to say it.

King v. Burwell decided whether or not health care subsidies could be provided by the federal government to residents of states that did not set up health care exchanges.

Scalia argued that the outcome in this case should have been pretty “obvious.”

And so, when his colleagues ruled in favor of the federal government, Scalia had some words for them.

Fox News reports:

“You would think the answer would be obvious—so obvious there would hardly be a need for the Supreme Court to hear a case about it.”

Scalia did not share Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion that the language was ambiguous.

“Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.'”

Scalia derided the court for seeming be going out of its way to protect ObamaCare.

“Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved.”

He went on to call one part of the majority’s opinion “pure applesauce,” accused his colleagues of doing “somersaults of statutory interpretation” and ended by saying that with this new ruling, “we should start calling this law SCOTUScare.”

Judge Andrew Napolitano had similar sentiments, and supports Scalia’s remarks.