In a scathing dissent this morning, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia rebuked his colleagues on the bench for a 6-3 ruling that upholds ObamaCare subsidies.

The challenge in King v. Burwell centered around whether health care subsidies could be provided by the federal government to residents of states that did not set up health care exchanges.

Opponents argued that the subsidies were designed to apply only to people who signed up for health exchanges that were "established by the state," not by the federal government.

Scalia argued that the outcome in this case seemed rather "obvious" to him. 

"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."

In the clip above, watch Judge Andrew Napolitano's reaction to the ruling on Fox Business Network. You can read the justices' opinions, here.

Read more on the crucial ruling at

Judge Nap: 'Bizarre Contortions' by Roberts in New ObamaCare Ruling

'You Want a War? You Got a War': O'Reilly Blasts 'Liars' Who Call U.S. a 'Racist' Nation

Man's Phone Catches Doctor Mocking Him During Surgery