The Supreme Court on Monday ordered a New York court to take a new look at whether some religious organizations should be excluded from a state regulation requiring health insurance plans to cover abortions.

The justices acted after the court unanimously ruled earlier in June that Wisconsin discriminated against a Catholic charity by forcing it to pay state unemployment taxes.

The New York case poses a similar issue because the state exempts religious employers if their purpose is to spread religious values and they primarily employ and serve people of their faith. But religious groups that serve and employ people regardless of their beliefs don't qualify for the exemption.

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany and other church groups challenged the rule.

It's the second time the nation's highest court has sent the case back to New York courts. Last year, the New York Court of Appeals upheld the regulation after taking into account the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in 2021 in favor of a Catholic foster care agency in Philadelphia that refused to work with same-sex couples because of its religious opposition to same-sex marriage.

Also Monday, the Supreme Court said it will hear from a faith-based pregnancy center in New Jersey challenging a state investigation alleging it misled people into thinking its services included referrals for abortion.

The justices agreed to consider an appeal from First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, which wants to block a 2023 subpoena from New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin seeking information about donors, advertisements and medical personnel. It has not yet been served.

Attorneys for First Choice Women’s Resource Centers describe the organization as a “faith-based, pro-life pregnancy center." The organization generally seek to steer women facing an unwanted pregnancy away from choosing an abortion.

The group challenged the subpoena in federal court, but a judge found that the case wasn’t yet far enough along to weigh in. An appeals court agreed.

First Choice Women’s Resource Centers appealed to the Supreme Court, saying the push for donor information had chilled its First Amendment rights.

“State attorneys general on both sides of the political aisle have been accused of misusing this authority to issue demands against their ideological and political opponents," its lawyers wrote. “Even if these accusations turn out to be false, it is important that a federal forum exists for suits challenging those investigative demands.”.

Meanwhile, Platkin, a Democrat, has sought to enforce the subpoena in state court, but the judge there has so far refused the state’s push to require the group to turn over documents and told the two sides to negotiate instead.