Armed Forces Court of Appeals Hears Oral Arguments On Court Martial For Refusing To Remove Religious Signs
This is from religionclause.blogspot.com which you can find here:
Keller [representing the government] argued the Sterling was not punished for putting up religious signs, but rather for defying orders….
He also argued because Sterling never sought a religious accommodation and only raised the religious protections issue later, there was no argument that her religious freedoms were “substantially burdened” under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Clement [representing Lance Cpl. Monifa Sterling] rebutted that because she invoked religious freedom later doesn’t mean that it’s not a fair consideration.