I'm imagining a US circuit court where the majority of judges were ideologically opposed to the present direction of the Supreme Court. What would happen if they begin to consistently issue rulings that clearly contradict ones established recently by the Supreme Court?

• In this situation, most of the decisions would likely be reversed by the Supreme Court. How swiftly could they reverse? Would the increased number of disputed cases slow down the Supreme Court's normal functioning?
• Would the judges face reprimand or the threat of removal?
• What incentives prevent this from happening right now? As I understand it, most lower court decisions treat Supreme Court precedent, especially recent precedent, as inarguable truth, forming the axiomatic basis of the lower court's decisions. However, when lower court judges disagree with the recent Supreme Court decisions or philosophical trends, what stops them from ruling based on their own judicial philosophies instead?