They will rule that the word “state” means the federal government.
And sometimes it does, like when we speak of the State Department or the Secretary of State. But often it doesn't, like when we speak of doing our state income tax, or when the Constitution says "...these rights are reserved to the states or the people."
Jonathan Gruber's comments easily clarify the context in which "state" was being used, i.e., as opposed to "federal." That is why he spoke at length about coercing governors, especially recalcitrant republican governors, into setting up state exchanges, lest their citizens be unable to get subsidies.
Indeed, if Obama/Gruber wanted everyone to be eligible for subsidies, why even bother creating both types? And, if there was a legal or even a political reason to have both types, a first-year law student could have plainly stated: "Although both state and federal exchanges are being created, either one will be able to grant subsidies to those citizens within each state who qualify for them."
This was not a typo or a mistake. It was intended to force governors to create state exchanges, but the plan backfired. Now, they are desperately trying to claw their way out of their own trap.