In CT state Court= we still have individual voire dire-- and usually not even in the presence of a judge for routine civil matters. Each lawyer gets to question each juror him or her self with only the lawyers, and possibly a clerk present. Wide latitude would be an understatement-- but you have to remember not to be unduly invasive (which is difficult in some cases) or aggressive, because if the juror stays and you offended them-- your client will pay. If you have a challenge for cause on the grounds that the juror has expressed an inability or unwillingness to apply the facts to the law, you take it to the judge, who then usually rehabilitates the juror by reminding them it is there duty to apply the facts to the law. This usually works, in the cases where the juror is just looking to void jury duty. If the juror has life experiences or strongly held beliefs which would make it difficult for them to be impartial, they are excused. If a juror you don't like is not excused for cause- you can use a preemptory- which you can use for any legal (e.g. can't try to strike all the females because there females, etc) reason. Usually have 3 preemptories, but that is subject to discretion of the trial judge-- and is usually affected by number of parties (usually defendants) whose interests are not necessarily alligned (I may be confusing state with federal here-- can't recall the exact state court rule at the moment)..
Fed is generally same noted by HowieT2-- but each Judge has there own twists- with some letting the lawyers question the panel of prospetive jurors directly, or sometimes even individual jurors (either in front of the other jurors or at side bar).
