Making the GM sale hearing a bit more contentious?

I'm still thinking about the Supreme Court's opinion today, which held that the terms of the 1986 Manville plan are binding even if they exceeded the bankruptcy court's jurisdiction, but my initial take is that this makes the fight over selling the GM assets "free and clear" more important, because the tort creditors can't count on being able to challenge the order after the fact.  Of course, I've already argued that current tort claims probably are subject to §363(f), but plainly the tort claimants (and perhaps others) don't agree.