- Two huge wins for religiousliberty here at the Court

on one of the very last days of this term.

- Significant victories onreligious liberty today,

by a margin of seven to two.

And so, if anything,this should send a signal

to the culture that weshould all be protecting

and valuing and cherishingreligious liberty.

(crowd cheering)

- [Paul] The religiousrights legal group Becket

represented the Little Sisters of the Poor

in their fight againstthe Obamacare mandate

to violate their conscience

and provide abortioncausing contraceptives

through their healthcare plan.

- [Loraine] We knew immediatelythat we could not comply.

To do so would have been anirreconcilable contradiction

of the belief that guidesour ministry and life's work.

- The Supreme Court hasresoundingly declared

that religious Americans are entitled

to the full protection of theConstitution and of our laws.

- [Paul] The Court left no doubt.

- [Mark] The federalgovernment is obligated,

is obligated, not to second-guess

the Sisters' religiousbeliefs, not to say,

"Oh, Sister, you shouldn'tbe so worried about this,"

or, "That's not really a sin."

Again, the Court rejectedthat kind of thinking.

- What was at stake in these cases

was whether or not the government

could force an individualor an institution,

in this case an order ofRoman Catholic sisters,

the Little Sisters of the Poor,

to engage in behavior thatthey believe to be immoral,

to engage in behavior that they thought

would violate the commandsthat they've been given by God.

- [Paul] The White House weighed in,

stating, "Twice beforein this ongoing saga

"the Supreme Court hasblocked these overly rigid

"and misguided efforts andsided with religious freedom.

"Today, it has once againvindicated the conscience rights

"of people of faith."

But if the White House changes hands,

this fight may erupt again.

- If a Democrat wins theWhite House the next election,

I absolutely expect theseregulations to change,

to go back to something more like

the Obama adminstration's rules

that will much more limit the ability

of religious ministries to get exemptions

from the contraception mandate.

- [Paul] In the second ruling,

the Court granted religious employers

the right to hire and fire employees

without government interference,

and answered whether twoformer Catholic school teachers

can also be considered ministers

when the school's primaryidentity and mission is religious.

Justice Alito for the majority wrote,

"When a school with a religious mission

"entrusts a teacher witheducating students in the faith,

"judicial intervention into those disputes

"threatens the school's independence

"in a way that the FirstAmendment does not allow."

Justice Thomas called today's decision

a step in the right direction,adding that the issue,

"Is an inherently theological question

"and cannot be resolved by civil courts."

Religious rights advocates agreed,

saying it upholds the high court's

ministerial exception doctrine.

- [Eric] If you're teachingreligion at a religious school,

then you fall within thisministerial exception.

That has to be that thechurches and the synagogues

and the mosques have to have control over

who teaches their faith.

- But others believe the ruling

opens the door for thepotential for abuse.

Justice Sotomayor, writing forherself and Justice Ginsberg,

that the majority's approachhas no legal basis and,

"Gives an employer freerein to discriminate

"on traits protected by law,

"even when the discriminationis wholly unrelated

"to the employer's religiousbeliefs or practices."

But the Family ResearchCouncil's Tony Perkins says,

"Today's First Amendment decision

"suggests that religious institutions

"still have a prayer of preserving

"and promoting their biblical teachings

"when it comes to employment decisions."

The Court's majority said thisruling was built on precedent

and affirmed the high court's aversion

to risk what it callsjudicial entanglement

when it comes to religious issues.

Paul Strand, CBN News, the supreme.