united-states

The jury selection process (voir dire) is normally done in open court. Bob's statements would be heard by anyone present. Reporters can be present, and may choose to publish accounts, including quotes of such statements. In short, Bob's statements are likely to become widely known.

Given the "at will" nature of most US employment, an employer may fire, or refuse to hire, Bob for any expressed belief of Bob's of which the employer does not approve, with the narrow exceptions covered by anti-discrimination law. There is no special protection for statements made during court proceedings, except that such statements generally can not be grounds for defamation suits.

Thus the law grants Bob no specific protection in such a case. What bo\b could do is say something such as:

I have a personal belief which would make it impossible for me to be an unbiased juror inn this case. I would prefer not to discuss the details in public.

The judge might simply dismiss Bob, or might question Bob in chambers with the lawyers present but off the record.

Of course Bob could lie, and claim to be unbiased. If Bob's views are not known to others, or not to many others, such a lie might be unlikely to be exposed. Of course, if exposed, Bob might be punished for contempt of court, or in theory for perjury, although that last is quite unlikely.

But the answer to the question asked here is that Bob has no special protection because his statement was made as part of a court proceeding. A state legislature (or congress, for federal proceedings) could perhaps provide such protections, but to the best of my knowledge, none has to date.

united-states

The jury selection process (voir dire) is normally done in open court. Walter's statements would be heard by anyone present. Reporters can be present, and may choose to publish accounts, including quotes of such statements. In short, Walter's statements are likely to become widely known.

Given the "at will" nature of most US employment, an employer may fire, or refuse to hire, Walter for any expressed belief of Walter's of which the employer does not approve, with the narrow exceptions covered by anti-discrimination law. There is no special protection for statements made during court proceedings, except that such statements generally can not be grounds for defamation suits.

Thus the law grants Walter no specific protection in such a case. What Walter could do is say something such as:

I have a personal belief which would make it impossible for me to be an unbiased juror inn this case. I would prefer not to discuss the details in public.

The judge might simply dismiss Walter, or might question Walter in chambers with the lawyers present but off the record.

Of course Walter could lie, and claim to be unbiased. If Walter's views are not known to others, or not to many others, such a lie might be unlikely to be exposed. Of course, if exposed, Walter might be punished for contempt of court, or in theory for perjury, although that last is quite unlikely.

But the answer to the question asked here is that Walter has no special protection because his statement was made as part of a court proceeding. A state legislature (or congress, for federal proceedings) could perhaps provide such protections, but to the best of my knowledge, none has to date.