WASHINGTON: Justice Neil Gorsuch’s first full term on the U.S. Supreme Court promises to show just how much was at stake with his appointment.

The term that opens Monday is full of ideologically divisive cases that could turn on a single vote.

The term “will be momentous,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg predicted last month.

It might also be a conservative rout, given President Donald Trump’s selection of Gorsuch to fill what ended up being a 14-month vacancy. Since he was confirmed in April, Gorsuch has aligned himself with the court’s conservative wing.

Here are some of the court’s biggest cases, with scheduled argument dates:

Class actions

Monday: The term starts with a case that could let companies enforce agreements in which workers promise to pursue wage or job discrimination claims in arbitration, and not in class action lawsuits.

Employers want to extend 2011 and 2013 Supreme Court decisions in which a conservative majority said companies can channel disputes with consumers and other businesses into arbitration. But some lower courts have said workplaces are different because federal labor law gives employees the right to engage in “concerted activities.”

Companies say that provision must yield to a 1925 law that requires arbitration agreements to be enforced like any other contract.

“The employers have a few advantages going in here, particularly with a more receptive set of justices,” said Greg Garre, a Washington lawyer at Latham & Watkins LLP and former solicitor general under President George W. Bush.

Gerrymandering

Oct. 10: The Supreme Court has never struck down a voting map as being so partisan it violates the Constitution. Critics of gerrymandering hope a case over a Republican-drawn Wisconsin map will provide the occasion.

Wisconsin Democrats say the map virtually assures Republicans will maintain a majority in the state Assembly, even if they lose the popular vote as they did in 2012.

The pivotal vote belongs to Justice Anthony Kennedy, who said in 2004 that he wouldn’t preclude partisan gerrymandering lawsuits but hadn’t yet seen a manageable test to determine how much politics was too much. Democrats are proposing a test that relies in part on statistical analyses of voting patterns.

Ohio voter purges

Nov. 8: An Ohio voter-purge clash has become a flashpoint in the broader fight over the rules governing who can cast ballots. The state removes people from the rolls if they don’t vote during a six-year period and don’t respond to a request to confirm their address.

Ohio says the system is a legitimate method to keep its voter database up-to-date. Opponents say the procedure is a voter suppression tool that violates a 2002 federal law.

The Trump administration is backing Ohio. The president has drawn criticism for claiming without evidence that 3 million people voted illegally for his opponent, Hillary Clinton. Trump then appointed a voting fraud commission, controlled by GOP hard-liners, to examine the issue.

ellphone privacy

Not yet scheduled: The court will take up a major test of digital privacy when it considers whether prosecutors need a warrant to get cellphone tower records that include months of information about a person’s location.

Timothy Carpenter is seeking to overturn his conviction for taking part in nine armed robberies in the Detroit area. At trial, prosecutors used phone data to show Carpenter was near the site of each robbery when it occurred.

Critics say prosecutors are able to get massive amounts of data without having to meet the “probable cause” standards for a search warrant. The largest telecommunications providers receive tens of thousands of requests for location information a year under the 1986 Stored Communications Act, which doesn’t require a warrant.

“I think this is the most consequential case that’s currently on the court’s docket,” said Kannon Shanmugam, a Washington lawyer at Williams & Connolly LLP.

Free speech

Not yet scheduled: What began as a brief discussion about a wedding cake has grown into a Supreme Court dispute between some of the nation’s most cherished values.

On one side are Charlie Craig and David Mullins, who were turned away when they visited a Colorado bakery to order a cake for their wedding. On the other is Jack Phillips, a baker who says he can’t create a cake for a gay wedding without violating his religious beliefs.

The Colorado Civil Rights Commission said Phillips violated a state law that bars discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation by businesses that sell to the public. Phillips says his constitutional speech and religious rights are being infringed.

Kennedy, a champion of free speech and gay rights, will again be at the center of the debate and likely to cast the deciding vote.

“Here we actually have two aspects of Justice Kennedy’s jurisprudence pitted against each other,” said Yaakov Roth, a Washington lawyer at Jones Day.

Travel ban

No argument scheduled: Although the court has dropped its planned Oct. 10 argument on Trump’s ban on travel to the U.S. from a group of mostly Muslim countries, the justices still must decide what to do with the case. They signaled they might dismiss the case and let a lower court take the first look at the new policy. But even if they do, the matter could quickly return to the high court.