The jury in the New York state trial of Luigi Mangione will remain anonymous, the judge overseeing the case ruled on Tuesday.

Mangione has pleaded not guilty to the killing of UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson outside a Manhattan hotel in December 2024.

The case has been at the centre of an online frenzy between Mangione’s backers – many of whom see the 28-year-old as a symbol of the backlash against US healthcare costs – and his critics, who analyse his intentions and possible political views.

In Tuesday’s hearing, Judge Gregory Carro decided the 12-person jury would be anonymous to the public because of the intense spotlight on the case.

Mangione attended the final pre-trial hearing dressed in a charcoal grey suit with his hair clipped short. He sat silently at the defence table while his attorneys conferred with the judge.

The trial begins next month, with jury selection scheduled to start on 8 September.

Mangione, if found guilty, could face decades behind bars. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges, including second-degree murder and weapons-related offences.

He faces a separate federal trial next year, in which he has also pleaded not guilty.

Here’s what to know about the upcoming trial, and what questions remain.

Mangione’s lawyers and prosecutors have traded terse court filings debating how much access the public will have to the trial.

The public are allowed to watch court proceedings in New York, but seating space is often limited for high-profile cases.

Mangione’s trial is expected to generate significant media interest from both traditional journalists as well as streamers and social media influencers. Mangione’s supporters have demanded more transparency, and frequently post and broadcast from outside court.

On Tuesday, Carro said the court would open an overflow room, which will allow more people to attend.

Caro pushed back against prosecutors for raising security concerns about an overflow room, telling them it was not the court’s “first rodeo” with blockbuster cases.

The judge also rebuked Mangione’s attorneys for their filings, saying any suggestion the district attorney’s office was involved in the process “is simply incorrect”.

One of the most crucial elements of the Mangione case was decided in a multi-day hearing in December, where the judge weighed which evidence prosecutors could present during trial.

Mangione’s team wanted to exclude evidence recovered from his Pennsylvania arrest. It alleged that state police improperly seized and searched Mangione’s possessions, and did not properly advise him of his constitutional rights before questioning him.

The defence succeeded in excluding some items, including a gun magazine, cell phone, passport, wallet and computer chip found in Mangione’s backpack.

But Judge Gregory Carro allowed at trial a gun and notebook with Mangione’s purported writings, viewed as vital to the prosecution.

Prosecutors have unveiled surveillance footage showing the moment Thompson was shot from behind by a hooded individual. They also used footage to piece together Mangione’s alleged movements after the shooting, and ballistics and fingerprint evidence they claim bolsters their case.

Mangione’s legal team has yet to unveil its full strategy. So far, his lawyers have not offered a robust alternative theory to the one prosecutors have put forth.

“We do not have, like in ‘The Fugitive,’ the idea of the one-armed man who’s the real killer,” said former federal prosecutor Mitchell Epner, referencing the 1993 Harrison Ford thriller about a man wrongly convicted of killing his wife.

Earlier this summer, Mangione’s lawyers proposed, then quickly withdrew, an “extreme emotional disturbance” argument.

In such a defence, New York law requires lawyers to show a defendant “acted under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance for which there was a reasonable explanation or excuse”.

Extreme emotional disturbance would allow the jury to consider the less severe charge of manslaughter, rather than second-degree murder. But jurors would have to be convinced of the accused’s state of mind at the time.

Mangione’s team did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

As in every US criminal trial, the burden rests on the prosecution to prove its case to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt, a high legal bar.

“The more his case is about the question of who killed the victim, the easier it is for the prosecution,” said Epner.

Epner cited other themes, including healthcare in America, as potential narrative threads that could sway a jury in Mangione’s favour.

“The more it’s about the other peripheral issues, the harder it is for the prosecution,” he said.