What options does a lawyer have to challenge a biased juror during voir dire?

During voir dire, a lawyer has specific tools at their disposal to challenge jurors who may exhibit bias. Utilizing a peremptory challenge allows lawyers to remove a juror without needing to provide a reason, though these challenges are limited in number. This method is beneficial when a juror’s bias may not be explicitly evident but could nonetheless affect their impartiality.

On the other hand, a challenge for cause requires the lawyer to articulate a specific rationale for believing that a juror cannot be impartial. This could stem from the juror's previous experiences, knowledge about the case, or expressed opinions that demonstrate a clear bias. If the judge agrees with the challenge for cause, the juror is removed from the jury pool without the limitation that applies to peremptory challenges.

Considering these methods is essential because they directly relate to ensuring a fair trial. The options available for excluding a juror aim to uphold the integrity of the judicial process, ensuring that both parties receive a fair and impartial jury. Other choices mentioned do not provide effective means to address a biased juror during the critical period of jury selection.