(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court's nine-month term that began on Oct. 7 includes cases involving guns, gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, online pornography, federal regulatory powers concerning nuclear waste storage and vape products, job discrimination, voting rights, securities fraud suits and more.

Here is a look at some of the cases before the justices.

'GHOST GUNS'

The court on Oct. 8 heard arguments over the legality of a 2022 federal regulation devised by President Joe Biden's administration to crack down on "ghost guns," largely untraceable firearms whose use has proliferated in crimes. A lower court found that the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives exceeded its authority in issuing the rule targeting parts and kits for ghost guns, which can be assembled at home in minutes. The justices during the arguments signaled a willingness to uphold the regulation. A ruling is expected by the end of June.

MEXICO GUNS LAWSUIT

A bid by U.S. gun maker Smith & Wesson and firearms wholesaler Interstate Arms to throw out Mexico's lawsuit accusing them of aiding the illegal trafficking of firearms to Mexican drug cartels will go before the justices. They appealed a lower court's refusal to dismiss Mexico's suit under a 2005 U.S. law that broadly shields gun companies from liability for crimes committed with their products. The suit accused gun companies of knowingly maintaining a distribution system that leads to guns being trafficked to cartels in Mexico. Arguments are scheduled for March 4.

TRANSGENDER RIGHTS

The court is set to decide the legality of a Republican-backed ban in Tennessee on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors. The Biden administration appealed a lower court's decision upholding Tennessee's ban on medical treatments including hormones and surgeries for minors experiencing gender dysphoria. That refers to the significant distress that can result from incongruity between a person's gender identity and the sex they were assigned at birth. Arguments are scheduled for Dec. 4.

ONLINE PORNOGRAPHY

The justices will consider whether a Texas law that requires pornographic websites to verify the age of users in an effort to restrict access to minors violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment safeguard against government infringement of speech. A trade group representing adult entertainment performers and companies appealed a lower court's decision upholding the Republican-led state's age-verification measure, finding that it likely did not violate the First Amendment. Arguments are scheduled for Jan. 15.

WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION

The issue of workplace discrimination comes before the justices in a case involving whether it should be more difficult for workers from "majority backgrounds," such as white or heterosexual people, to prove job bias claims in lawsuits. They will hear an appeal by a heterosexual woman seeking to revive her lawsuit against the Ohio Department of Youth Services in which she said she lost her job to a gay man and was passed over for a promotion in favor of a gay woman in violation of federal civil rights law. Arguments are scheduled for Feb. 26.

NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE

The court is set to consider whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has the authority to license nuclear waste storage facilities following a judicial ruling that upended decades of practice by declaring it does not. The Biden administration and a company that was awarded a license by the NRC to build a waste storage facility in Texas appealed the lower court's ruling. The license was challenged by the states of Texas and New Mexico, as well as oil industry interests. The case is another one testing the power of U.S. regulatory agencies. Arguments are scheduled for March 5.

FLAVORED VAPE PRODUCTS

The court is due to hear the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's defense of the agency's rejection of applications by two companies to sell flavored vape products that it has determined pose health risks for young consumers. A lower court ruled that the FDA failed to follow proper legal procedures under federal law when it denied the applications to bring their nicotine-containing products to market. The case is another one testing the power of U.S. regulatory agencies. Arguments are scheduled for Jan. 21.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES FUND

A dispute over the legality of a congressionally authorized fund operated by the Federal Communications Commission to expand access to telecommunications services is going before the justices. Challengers including the conservative group Consumers' Research accused Congress of unlawfully delegating its authority to an independent federal agency. The FCC and a coalition of interest groups and telecommunications firms appealed a lower court's decision that found Congress violated the Constitution by empowering the FCC to manage the fund. No date has been set for arguments.

LOUISIANA ELECTORAL MAP

The justices will decide a bid by Louisiana officials and civil rights groups to preserve an electoral map that raised the number of Black-majority congressional districts in the state in a legal challenge by a group of voters who called themselves "non-African American." A panel of three federal judges found that the map laying out Louisiana's six U.S. House of Representatives districts - with two Black-majority districts, up from one previously - likely violated the Constitution's promise of equal protection. No date has been set for arguments.

NVIDIA SECURITIES FRAUD LAWSUIT

The justices heard arguments on Nov. 13 on Nvidia's bid to scuttle a securities fraud lawsuit accusing the artificial intelligence chipmaker of misleading investors about how much of its sales went to the volatile cryptocurrency industry. Nvidia appealed after a lower court revived a proposed class action brought by shareholders in California against the company and its CEO. Nvidia has become one of the biggest beneficiaries of the AI boom. A ruling is expected by the end of June.

FACEBOOK SECURITIES FRAUD LAWSUIT

In a case similar to the Nvidia one, the court on Nov. 22 sidestepped a decision on whether to let shareholders proceed with a securities fraud lawsuit accusing Meta's Facebook of misleading investors about the misuse of the social media platform's user data. The justices heard arguments in the case on Nov. 6, but on Nov. 22 dismissed Facebook's appeal of a lower court's ruling that allowed a 2018 class action led by Amalgamated Bank to proceed. Its action leaves the lower court's decision in place.

DEATH PENALTY CASE

The court heard arguments on Oct. 9 in a bid by Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip, convicted in a 1997 murder-for-hire, for a new trial based on his claim that prosecutors wrongly withheld certain evidence favorable to his defense. A lower court decided that the newly obtained evidence would not have changed the case's outcome. The Supreme Court in 2023 put on hold Glossip's scheduled execution. During the arguments, the justices raised concerns about the lower court's decision that would let the execution move forward. A ruling is expected by the end of June.

(Compiled by Andrew Chung, John Kruzel and Daniel Wiessner; Editing by Will Dunham)