Gorsuch’s aspiration to intellectual leadership fairly bursts from his votes and opinions and seems to have formed early in his career. He might accomplish it if emerging splits within the close-knit family of conservative legal thinkers break his way.

In practice, this means Gorsuch decides cases a little differently from his colleagues, including the two others appointed by former President Donald Trump, Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. In every case, no matter how small or large, he takes pains to shape a consistent judicial philosophy that defines the conservative position.

The results so far have been noteworthy. Gorsuch has delivered some extremely conservative opinions on religious liberty and other issues. But he also authored the landmark opinion Bostock v. Clayton County, which conferred workplace anti-discrimination rights on gay and transgender people and was lauded by liberals and condemned by many conservatives.

Gorsuch’s trademark is that he is uninterested in precedent, preferring logical coherence to adherence to what the court has done in the past. He is all but certain to side with the other conservatives intent on using an upcoming Mississippi case to overturn the 48-year-old right to an abortion. Yet he may have other surprises like the Bostock opinion in store.