We'll see less of it. The point of the court ruling was to prevent tribes from being used as legal proxies. If a company wants to transfer legal rights to a tribe, it means they're also going to need to transfer actual independent ownership interests as well.

We've already seen contracts widely used as a way to dissolve the sovereignty of US states and bypass their laws.

Contracts are enforced at the state level (not the federal level), so I'd like to know what cases you're referring to here?