6:11 p.m.: It’s been a long long day, and Atticus Finch, Esq., the Affordable Care Cat, is pooped. We’re going to wrap up for the day, but thanks so much for joining us here on the KHN live blog. It’s been swell.
6:04 p.m.: Governors from all sorts of states respond to the health law decision in this cool infographic from Statereforum.
5:48 p.m.: Don’t miss our KHN story on what the Medicaid ruling means for states.
“The Supreme Court has given states a way out of expanding the Medicaid program under the health law, but governors will be under strong pressure to take the federal money that would pay for coverage for millions of low-income people,” KHN’s Phil Galewitz and Marilyn Werber Serafini report.
5:40 p.m.: Missouri won’t take the federal money for expanding Medicaid, Missouri House Budget Chairman Ryan Silvey told KHN’s Phil Galewitz in a phone interview. “I don’t see any chance of that happening,” he said.
According to Silvey, Missouri can’t afford to pay more than $100 million a year starting in 2017 to pay its portion of the coverage expansion. “Its just not a sustainable option,” he explained. He expects that most states will opt out.
The expansion would result in cuts in state spending on education and public safety, he added.
Asked how turning down the expansion money would play, Silvey told KHN, “My job is to balance the state budget.”
5:32 p.m.: NPR has a useful interactive look at the Supreme Court’s written decision that allows you to navigate to key portions. Check it out here.
5:13 p.m.: In a strange and mysterious way, “Obamacare comes full circle.” Check out this circle chart from ABC News.
4:51 p.m.: On the blog Just Enrichment, Adam Chandler has some fodder on what internal deliberations in the court brought about this decision, suggesting that Roberts may have changed sides at the last minute.
“Jeffrey Toobin tweeted that ‘Roberts was red-eyed and unhappy as he read’ his opinion in Court this morning, which might be grist for speculation that he came to his position late and grudgingly. One wonders why we didn’t hear Justice’s Scalia’s voice on this. He would have been the senior Justice in the coalition of four, giving him assigning power on an issue that animated him a great deal during oral argument. Was it too late for him to whip out his poison pen after Roberts decided to uphold the Act? The only conservative dissenter to write separately was Justice Thomas, and his separate dissent was just a paragraph. Did Roberts act so late in the day that none of them had time to write a full dissent from scratch?”
In an update, Chandler adds that “Justice Ginsburg’s opinion uses strongly critical language throughout, directed almost exclusively at the Chief Justice rather than the other four conservatives. It does not read as someone trying to woo him to her side, but rather as a stinging dissent from a decision striking down the individual mandate.”