us-supreme-court conflict-of-interest recusal
What would happen if a case before the Supreme Court court involved a conflict of interest for all justices?
<p>I realize this might be a silly scenario, but suppose that nine of the storage units in the <a href="https://www.jurist.org/news/2022/03/us-supreme-court-finds-breaking-into-multiple-storage-units-equals-one-crime-for-sentencing-enhancement-purposes/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wooden v. United States</a> case had been rented by Supreme Court justices. Then all of the justices might have a conflict of interest in a case that was presented before the court. What would happen in this scenario? Would they just have to let the lower court's ruling stand?</p>
<p>(If I understand <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/supct/rule_4" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this rule</a> correctly, if four justices had conflicts of interest, the court would lack a quorum. That's more likely, though admittedly very unlikely.)</p>

<p>If six justices decided that the case were sufficiently important, they could refrain from recusing themselves so as to be able to hear it.  If that didn't happen, the lower court's ruling would stand, as you suggest.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If I understand this rule correctly, if four justices had conflicts of interest, the court would lack a quorum. That's more likely, though admittedly very unlikely.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However unlikely it may be, it has actually happened (for example, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-524.html" rel="noreferrer">Shao v. Roberts</a>).</p>
