Opening statements are set to begin Thursday in the criminal trial of Ryan Routh, the man accused of attempting to assassinate Donald Trump on his golf course last year.

With instances of political violence on the rise, the trial is expected to revisit one of the most high-profile instances of alleged violence directed at Trump in the waning days of the 2024 election.

Prosecutors allege that Routh put together a methodical plan — including purchasing a military-grade weapon, researching Trump’s movements, and utilizing a dozen burner phones — to kill Trump based on political grievances.

Hiding in the bushes of Trump’s Palm Beach golf course and armed with a rifle, Routh allegedly came within a few hundred yards of the then-presidential nominee before a Secret Service agent spotted his rifle poking out of the tree line.

Routh allegedly fled the scene but was later arrested by a local sheriff’s office on a nearby interstate.

Nearly a year after the failed assassination attempt, Routh now faces five criminal counts that risk sending him to prison for the rest of his life. Despite lacking any legal education or experience, Routh dismissed his lawyers earlier this year and intends to defend himself at trial.

“I will be representing myself moving forward; It was ridiculous from the outset to consider a random stranger that knows nothing of who I am to speak for me,” Routh told U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in a July letter. “I am so sorry, I know this makes your life harder.”

Routh’s self-representation created some issues during the three days of jury selection earlier this week. Judge Cannon — who previously oversaw and dismissed one of Trump’s criminal cases — refused to use many of his proposed jury questions, deeming them too “political.”

Among other subjects, Routh had proposed asking jurors about their stance on Palestine and Ukraine, and about Trump’s proposed acquisition of Greenland.

Routh has said in court filings that he plans to defend himself by focusing on his self-described peaceful nature and his care for humanity, in part by calling to the stand his son and multiple friends to testify about his character.

Judge Cannon has barred him from trying to argue that his alleged actions were justified, that he did not intend to carry out the assassination, or that his actions were protected by First Amendment rights.