The United States Supreme Court decided on Thursday that it will listen to arguments concerning recent religious freedom challenges with regard to mandated contraception. The major case that the Justice’s have decided to hear will concern a certain portion of the mandated Affordable Care Act.

As the law stands right now, most employers in the country are mandated and required to provide insurance coverage for female contraception at no cost to the employee, reports The New York Times. The law states that insurance must cover all contraception for women that has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. This will be the Court’s second case regarding contraception and the fourth time it has considered certain facets of the Affordable Care Act.

Insurance companies for all religious houses of worship, regardless of the religion practiced, are currently not forced to comply. This particular case will decide what the standing will be for particular institutions such as schools and hospitals that happen to be associated with a particular religion or an organization representing a certain religion.

The case that is under consideration is Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014). This is considered by the Court to be a for profit company whose corporate culture and decisions are made according to certain religious tenets and principles. A previous decision went 5-4 that such businesses as those would not be required to provide free coverage. The government had declared, with regard to these companies, that all they had to do was let the government and their insurance carriers know of their objections and that they put their petition for exemption in writing. This, opponents say, places an undue burden on them because filling out the paperwork makes it look they are complying with something that goes against their religious beliefs.

In one ruling on such matters a lower case judge wrote that the government “has a compelling interest” in contraception and she didn’t think filling out a two page form was an undue burden. Does religious freedom, guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, have to take a back seat every time the government has a “compelling interest?” What about the men? Is it discriminatory that men can’t have equal, and free, access to contraception like the women do? Are fines levied for non-compliance an undue burden?

These are just some of the extremely thorny issues the Justice’s will hearing arguments on.