U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon has allowed Ryan Routh, who is facing accusations of attempting to shoot Donald Trump at one of his golf courses last year, to represent himself in court. This decision has raised concerns among federal prosecutors who fear the trial could “turn into a spectacle.”

At 59 years old, Routh is set to present his case to a jury in September after pleading not guilty to charges including the attempted assassination of a presidential candidate, assault on a federal officer, and various firearm offenses. Earlier in the month, he requested permission from Judge Cannon, who was appointed by Trump, to dismiss his court-appointed attorneys, and she consented to his request on Thursday.

Routh tried to flex his legal muscles a day earlier in a pro se response to a DOJ motion filed on July 8, which asked Cannon to exclude “irrelevant and prejudicial evidence” that prosecutors expect to be filed by the defense and to admit certain trial evidence, including messages authored by Routh”s former employee Tina Cooper, who pleaded guilty in North Carolina for conspiring with Routh to help get his hands on weapons illegally.

The Justice Department torched Routh on Thursday in its reply to his filing, saying he was “mistaken” on numerous things that he alleged in the response, including an “odd claim” that the government has not identified specific pieces of evidence at issue.

“As outlined below, to the best of our ability lacking a defense exhibit list, we have done so,” the DOJ said. “And our arguments are more persuasive in light of the defendant’s decision to represent himself. This court has a responsibility to ensure that trial does not become a circus, and that the jury is not burdened and distracted by plainly inadmissible evidence.”

In addition to trying to kill Trump, Routh is also accused of possessing a firearm while a convicted felon and for possessing a gun with an “obliterated serial number,” offenses punishable by up to 15 years and 5 years respectively upon conviction. The Department of Justice says that two people helped illegally obtain a weapon “on his behalf,” specifically the SKS rifle that he allegedly brought to Trump International Golf Club, according to prosecutors.

In his response to the DOJ’s motion, Routh rambled about the “new DOJ, Trump, Bondi” and how one can’t “besmirch the Presidents morals when he has none,” according to the filing. “The defendant respectfully moves this court to recognize that the prosecution is making every attempt in this motion to silence the defense in every fashion,” Routh alleged.

“You propose to extract just the segment that suits your need and attempt to exclude the balance,” he said. “I am told that we are using the same suace/sauce [sic] for the go§se/goose and teh/the gander. … Why are you so fearful of current events, basic news adn teh truth [sic] — is it that painful.”

Replying to Routh’s response on Thursday, the DOJ didn’t mince words about how it felt about him representing himself. Prosecutors said they expected him to present statements from self-published “books” and other writings of his, as well as hearsay statements.

“It is the defendant’s evidence that is most likely to upend this trial by injecting irrelevant and prejudicial facts unrelated to the actual charges,” the DOJ said.

“None of the substantive legal arguments raised … has merit,” prosecutors blasted. “Portions of Routh’s filing do, however, make this Court’s pretrial rulings even more critical. Aside from attacking the victim’s morals … Routh mistakenly insists that the trial is not about the elements of the charged crimes, but a debate on his ‘good character’ versus the character of others.”

The DOJ noted how Routh claimed in his response “character is the whole of this entire case” and there is “nothing else” that can be argued. According to Routh, if one argues lack of intent it “totally hinges” on character and “character alone,” per his filing.

“So it is even more vital today that the court grant the Government’s in limine requests to keep the trial on track,” the DOJ concluded Thursday. “Doing so will be harder, not easier, in the moment, and jurors as well as justice will suffer.”