On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon decided not to step down from presiding over the case against Ryan Routh, who is charged with attempting to assassinate former President Donald Trump.

Routh requested that Cannon recuse herself since she was appointed by Trump and he has openly praised her work on his own criminal case involving classified documents. However, Cannon stated that her only encounter with Trump was in her courtroom and assured that she would approach Routh’s trial without bias.

“The Defendant refers to several reasons that he believes suggest bias, but Cannon explained that “None of these reasons justify recusal, either alone or together.”

Routh faces serious allegations, including attempted assassination, illegal possession of a firearm due to a prior felony, and having a firearm with a removed serial number. Authorities reported that he aimed an SKS rifle towards Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida, on September 15. A Secret Service agent noticed the weapon and fired at Routh, causing him to flee.

Routh has entered a not guilty plea.

His legal team contended that Cannon should step aside from the case, citing Trump’s commendations of her at the July Republican National Convention, where he referred to her as “a highly respected federal judge.” Additionally, Trump has publicly labeled her intelligent and strong, expressing pride in having appointed her.

Previously, Cannon dismissed federal allegations against Trump concerning illegal retention of national defense materials after his presidency, a decision currently being appealed by Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith.

A federal law requires judges to refrain from cases where their “impartiality may be reasonably questioned.”

Despite Routh’s claims of Cannon’s potential bias stemming from her past interactions with Trump, she dismissed these concerns. She also noted that having gone to high school with one of the prosecutors and attending his wedding almost a decade ago does not affect her impartiality.

“As the Defendant acknowledges, I cannot control what people—whether private citizens, media, or public figures—say about me or my decisions,” Cannon stated. “I am not influenced by the potential political ramifications of my rulings or how they might be portrayed in the media.”