The general consensus is that ultimate swinger Justice Kennedy is leaning towards the defendants in King v. Burwell. Hot Air: "Supreme Court oral argument: Kennedy leaning towards White House’s view on ObamaCare subsidies?" Although I fancy myself an armchair lawyer, I don't get the line of his reasoning. He seems very concerned about federal coercion of the states but views removing subsidies from the federal exchanges somehow exacerbating this coercion because the states would be under tremendous pressure to set up their own exchanges. Um....OK. Then, as if to jerk us around some more, Reuters tells us he said: "Kennedy added that the challengers may win anyway based on the plain meaning of the provision at issue."
None of the liberal justices gave the slightest consideration to the textualism argument so it's (probably) all on Kennedy and the signs are not good.