Ruling secures for Obama a larger place in history Until Thursday, it wasn't clear that future generations would have much to assess about the enduring legislative legacy of the Obama presidency. There had been no victory on climate change, no shift in the way Washington worked, no grand bargain to cut the deficit. And it looked as if a hostile Supreme Court was going sour on the Obama administration's one big policy accomplishment - the marquee law achieving the liberal movement's decades-long goal of near-universal health care. A summary of the Supreme Court's decision on the health care law. See which justices were part of the majority opinions. Robert Barnes Justices did limit portion of law trying to expand Medicaid by ruling funding cannot be withdrawn if states fail to participate. So when the justices announced their 5 to 4 ruling upholding the health law, they suddenly put Obama back on a path to achieving the historic significance he promised in his campaign and so deeply desires. The ruling, however, may well complicate the president's quest for the biggest affirmation of all - a second term - by memorializing a broadly unpopular law. The measure that came to be known derisively as "Obamacare" inspired the rise of the tea party, helped spawn a voter backlash that handed Republicans the House just two years after Obama's convincing 2008 election victory, and now stands as one of the GOP's main arguments for ousting the president in November. Obama will have to explain the law's central provision - a requirement that all Americans buy health insurance or pay a penalty - in the face of aggressive efforts by Mitt Romney and other Republicans to portray the mandate as an unfair middle-class tax increase. Obama has categorically denied that it is a tax increase, but his administration's legal defense of the bill and now the Supreme Court ruling say otherwise, setting up a rhetorical tightrope for a president who vowed to cut middle-class taxes. Moreover, the administration will be forced to fend off criticism from experts that the law will achieve little, if any, of the cost containment that was the initial White House rationale for its passage. The ruling also included a surprising, and potentially costly, defeat for the Obama administration in allowing states to opt out of the health-care law's expansion of Medicaid coverage. That might lead to more people signing up for newly created insurance exchanges, which would add to the federal cost. Nevertheless, Obama - who has drawn scorn from critics for comparing himself to the greats, from ­Abraham Lincoln to Franklin D. Roosevelt - can finally include his name on the list of those who have secured landmark legislation. One senior aide told reporters Thursday that the law was on a par with Medicare and Social Security in its lasting importance. "Today, I'm as confident as ever that when we look back five years from now, or 10 years from now, or 20 years from now, we'll be better off because we had the courage to pass this law and keep moving forward," Obama said in an address to the nation from the East Room of the White House hours after the ruling. The short-term political gains were clear to strategists and experts. The decision undercut a key GOP attack line - that the president wasted two years pursuing an unconstitutional law rather than fixing the economy.