The Supreme Court has upheld the individual insurance requirement at the heart of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.
The court on Thursday handed Obama a campaign-season victory in rejecting arguments that Congress went too far in requiring most Americans to have health insurance or pay a penalty.
"Whatever the politics, today's decision was a victory for people all over this country."
The president says the decision means that people with pre-existing medical conditions will not be discriminated against and people will be able to afford quality health care.
The nation's highest court on Thursday upheld the individual insurance requirement at the center of the president's overhaul.
Polling has suggested that most Americans oppose the law and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney vowed again after the ruling to seek its repeal.
Meanwhile, Romney is promising that he will repeal the Affordable Care Act the Supreme Court just upheld.
The Republican called the decision incorrect and said Thursday that it is "bad law." He says it raises taxes and cuts Medicare.
Romney says that, if elected in November, he will work to repeal and replace the law. But he hasn't said precisely how.
As Massachusetts governor, Romney signed into law a measure that required all state residents to have health coverage. That notion was the cornerstone of the law enacted by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats. The high court decided it was constitutional.
Reaction in Nevada to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding is swift and mixed, with Democrats hailing the ruling and Republicans pledging to reform it.
Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval, who was critical of the law, says he may not agree with the decision but he respects the process. He says the implications for Medicaid costs are still unclear but the state will prepare to meet the mandates.
State officials have estimated the law would cost Nevada $575 million in the first five years as more people become eligible for Medicaid.
The Supreme Court said the expansion could proceed as long as the federal government does not threaten to withhold states' entire Medicaid allotment if they don't take part in the law's extension.