Republicans stuck by their anti-Obamacare rhetoric Thursday after the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare subsidies — but the party was divided on whether to use a fast-track budget procedure to kill the law they love to hate.

Shortly after the court handed down its 6-3 ruling in King v. Burwell, finding that subsidies awarded through federal-run health care exchanges were constitutional, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Republicans were still weighing their next legislative steps — and, notably, did not commit to using the expedited procedure, called reconciliation, to repeal the entire thing.

Story Continued Below

“We will continue our efforts to repeal the law and replace it with patient-centered solutions that meet the needs of seniors, small-business owners and middle-class families,” he said. “There was a lot of talk using reconciliation to deal with Obamacare, I’m sure there probably still is, but my point is there’s been no decision made as to how to pursue.”

Conservatives want to use reconciliation to speed a full repeal through Congress, something many thought was a done deal. They called on leadership to move quickly after the court’s announcement Thursday.

“Now is the time to act — now is the time to keep our word to the American people,” said rock-ribbed conservative Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.). “After 58 votes to repeal Obamacare in part or in whole, I call on our Republican leadership to use reconciliation to put a full repeal of Obamacare on the president’s desk.”

But there’s a divide in the party about how and even whether they should use the rare process to roll back the health care overhaul. Parliamentary rules will prevent the GOP from a full-scale repeal anyhow, and they’d have to find a way to pay for it — meaning they could have to find huge spending cuts elsewhere. Plus, some are uneasy about voting for repeal without offering a replacement to help Americans pay for insurance.

Overall, congressional reaction to the court’s decision followed well-worn partisan battle lines, with Democrats praising the decision and Republicans aghast.

Democrats hailed the verdict as a victory for the middle class.

“Obamacare has survived the latest partisan attempt to deny health care to working families, millions of working families won,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

And Reid — along with many other Democrats — implored Republicans to give up their long war against the health care law: “[S]top banging your heads against the wall on this legislation. It passed … Move on.”

But the GOP has no plans to relent.

“Republicans will continue to fight tooth and nail to repeal this oppressive law and replace it with patient-centered reforms that lower costs and increase access,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas.), the Senate’s No. 2 Republican, said in a statement. “Today’s decision doesn’t change the fact that Obamacare has been a disaster for the millions of hardworking American families who have seen their health care costs skyrocket or lost their insurance entirely.”

He also wasn’t shy about committing to an Obamacare repeal through reconciliation: “Since the Supreme Court ruled the way it did, we can take our time and go through the process that we all anticipated, which was a vote on repealing Obamacare. That was one of the things we decided to incorporate in the budget process.”

During budget negotiations this spring, the House wanted to keep its “options open” to use the procedure for other things beyond health care, but the Senate won out. And the final budget suggested reconciliation would either be used to fix the King ruling, or repeal the Affordable Care Act.

Around noon Thursday, however, the party was far from unified on a plan. Some Republicans were turning their attention to reconciliation to move a repeal, a process that allows the party to pass legislation with just 51 votes instead of the typical 60.

GOP leaders in both chambers initially promised to use the procedure for a full repeal earlier this year when they crafted their budget plan. But in recent weeks they’d backed off that pledge, thinking the fast-track procedure might be better used to replace Obamacare if the court had eliminated the subsidies.

Now, with the heart of the law upheld, conservatives say Republicans need to press ahead with a full repeal.

“We did want to potentially use it as an offramp to the subsidies, but since that’s no longer in play, the only thing left really is a repeal of Obamacare,” said Rep. John Fleming (R-La.). “An overwhelming majority of Republicans want repeal through reconciliation.”

Conservative groups, including the Club for Growth, lined up behind the idea: “The American people believe both subsidies and mandates are wrong, so it’s now up to Congress to use reconciliation to repeal Obamacare, and Congress should continue to do so until there is a president who is willing to sign that repeal,” Club President David McIntosh said in a statement post-verdict.

But reconciliation is not a bulletproof strategy. Budget and health policy leaders, for example, received a signal from the Senate parliamentarian that many of Obamacare’s provisions are not able to be repealed under Senate rules. They also have to find a way to pay for a full repeal, which costs a whopping $353 billion.

“You deal with the rules that we [have], and right now the rules are such that we can’t do everything we want to do on Obamacare during reconciliation,” said Budget Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.) when asked about the next ACA repeal effort.

Behind closed doors, GOP reservations about using reconciliation for repeal are twofold. The first is procedural. Why use such a valuable and rare tool to advance a repeal that will only attack parts of the ACA and is certain to be vetoed by Obama?

With that in mind, some Republicans would rather use reconciliation for legislation that may be tempting for Obama to sign, such as tax reform or Medicare changes. Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) talked in the speaker’s lobby about using it instead for entitlement reforms.

“It’s a little too early to make those kind of statements,” said Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas). “Reconciliation was always out there, it was always a possibility, but is it tax reform, is it health care? We’ll see.”

A second reservation comes from the moderate wing of the GOP. It’s leery of repealing Obamacare subsidies that help people financially without offering any sort of replacement they can lean on.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who is up for reelection in the purple state of Ohio, wouldn’t say, for example, if he favored an Obamacare repeal through reconciliation on Wednesday evening.

“We’ll see,” he said. “I don’t know. I haven’t really thought through that.”

Across the campus grounds, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), however, said repeal is far from out of the picture: “What we’re talking about doing is as much as we can and giving people a better alternative but within the rules prescribed that we have to work with.”

And on Thursday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) dared the GOP to keep trying.

“They’ll keep trying, and we’ll keep fighting,” she said. “They may try this, that, or the other thing, but the more time goes by, the more people benefit from the Affordable Care Act and the more ridiculous they look.”

Burgess Everett, Seung Min Kim, Lauren French, Erin Mershon and Natalie Villacorta contributed to this report.