Not good news. Since they cited Roberts, & since Roberts ruled it was a tax & therefore Constitutional, going back to the SC is not likely to help.
A tax?
Roberts was focused on the individual mandate as a tax, not on the Origination Clause. He decided the mandate was a tax in order to avoid finding that it was an unconstitutional exercise of the Commerce Clause (which was what the bill's authors actually intended).
But the bill actually contains a slew of new, unambiguous taxes, such as the medical device tax. The individual mandate was one among many.