I'm not optimistic. After Kelo vs New London, when the concept of private property rights went away, I lost faith. That was one of the biggest cases ever and it just proved that if you have enough money and you want something, you can have it, and the law is on your side, not the property owner.
About the obamacare funding mechanism...
I think they can plausibly conclude that it is a tax and that the interstate commerce argument is BS and that they are sick and tired of the government using that argument for every stinkin thing they want to do. But as for constitutionality of the funding mechanism, I just don't know. It could definitely go either way. If they let it stand, it may be technically right, but wrong in every other way.
If the argument is that the current system of third party payers is flawed and leads to perverse incentives, turning it into a system where a third party pays another third party is only going to make things worse.
I have a long list of anecdotes from people I know in Canada and Sweden. Bottom line is that socialized medicine is about killing off old people. If you have any gray hair, you will probably suffer in a system like that.