Can you wear a Trump or Harris hat to vote? It depends where you live

Millions of people have cast their votes in this election so far without incident. However, in some reported cases there were problems with voters' voting attire.

With early voting underway in Bexar County, Texas, Sheriff Javier Salazar recently told reporters that there have been several instances of voters wearing “inappropriate clothing” to support a political candidate.

“This is campaigning, and it’s certainly something you shouldn’t do,” Salazar said at a news conference last month.

In one case last month, things got “ugly,” he said, when a man allegedly punched a 69-year-old poll worker at an early voting site in San Antonio. According to Salazar, the altercation occurred when the man was being escorted from the premises after being asked to remove his political hat. According to an incident report, the man was wearing a red “MAGA” or “Trump” baseball cap.

“I can’t imagine anything like this happening during my time here as sheriff,” Salazar said.

An altercation broke out between a poll worker and a voter at a polling place in Orangeburg County, South Carolina last week after the voter was asked to remove his “Let's Go Brandon” hat, according to a police report and video of the incident.

In the video, the man can be heard saying, “It's my (expletive) right” while holding up the hat before throwing it away. During the altercation, a poll worker allegedly punched the man in the face, according to the incident report. The poll worker was not arrested but was issued a summons.

The incidents draw attention to laws that restrict forms of political activity in or near polling stations, to prohibit election advertising or any activity intended to influence voting in an election.

Every state has restrictions on campaigning in any form near polling places, “e.g. “For example, restricting the display of signs, distributing campaign literature, or soliciting votes within a predetermined distance (typically 50 to 200 feet) from a polling place,” the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) said in the release.

According to NCSL, nearly half of states, including Texas and South Carolina, have laws restricting the wearing of clothing while voting.

According to NCSL, these 21 states have laws restricting campaign clothing – such as shirts, hats and buttons – in polling places: Arkansas, California, Delaware, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Vermont.

NCSL's analysis is based on the provisions of the statutes. However, the organization advises voters to check with their local election official as implementation of campaign laws can vary within a state.

In addition to these 21 states, Massachusetts, for example, prohibits “the wearing of certain political attire (t-shirts, hats, buttons, pins, stickers, etc.)” within 150 feet of a voting location, according to a 2024 election advisory. Examples of prohibited materials include those that include a candidate's name or face on the ballot, as well as slogans “that closely align with or are actively used by candidates and campaigns,” the advisory says.

According to their respective secretaries of state, political clothing is not permitted at polling places in Missouri and Georgia. Voting is prohibited within 25 feet of a polling place in Missouri and within 150 feet of a polling place in Georgia.

Poll workers in Wisconsin are also told that “politically themed clothing or materials/clothing/buttons supporting a candidate, political party, or ballot initiative” are not permitted at the polling place, according to poll worker training materials.

Restrictions on political clothing could extend to political references that go beyond the candidates or issues on the ballot.

For example, in Texas, “it is prohibited to engage in campaigning, including expressing a preference for or against a candidate, measure or political party, whether or not it appears on the ballot or relates to the conduct of an election.” “ the Texas Secretary of State said in a recent statement.

According to Steven Huefner, a law professor at Ohio State University, election laws have a “long history.”

“In many states they are responding to times when voters were more intimidated or influenced at the polls,” he told ABC News. “They were responding to the potential for this type of activity to have a greater impact on the lesser-known breeds.”

He said voters may not know they exist in their state “unless it happened to them or they are election junkies.”

Penalties for violating campaign laws may include fines or imprisonment. However, people are typically asked to remove or cover political items in order to vote.

Some voters may view the restrictions on voting as a suppression of their First Amendment rights, Huefner noted.

“This is really a very limited and selective exception based on the desire to keep the electoral process as safe as possible,” he said. “Security includes preventing campaigns and their supporters from improperly influencing people when they vote.”

Voting laws have been challenged through civil rights lawsuits in several states, with some cases reaching the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a 1992 decision, the Supreme Court found that a Tennessee law limiting political campaigning to within 100 feet of a polling place did not violate the First Amendment.

In a 2018 decision, the Supreme Court found that Minnesota's law banning the wearing of political clothing at polling places was overly broad and violated the First Amendment. A voter filed the lawsuit after he was temporarily prevented from voting in 2010 because he wore a T-shirt with a Tea Party logo and a button promoting mandatory photo ID voting.

Today, Minnesota bans at polling places “campaign T-shirts, buttons or literature that reference specific candidates, official political parties or election questions on that day's ballot,” according to the Minnesota Secretary of State's Office.

In Texas, a woman sued after she had to turn a T-shirt inside out in support of a ballot measure during a 2018 election. The complaint argued that the state's election laws unconstitutionally limited their right to free speech and that enforcement was inconsistent. The laws were ultimately upheld by the Court of Appeals after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

Hüfner said enforcement of restrictions can be “pretty inconsistent” between poll workers and polling locations, which can lead to confusion.

“A lot of times it's enforced by volunteers who are poll workers who maybe don't even have a lot of training on how to handle it, or in one county they might be well trained and in another county other people aren't well trained,” he said.

Huefner said it was critical to eliminate any disparate enforcement, while also urging voters to “show some grace” to volunteers at polling places.

“Volunteers have really been subjected to some pretty sustained, unfortunate attacks recently, and it's all undeserved,” he said. “They provide this important public service.”

In the Texas incident cited by the Bexar County sheriff, 63-year-old Jesse Lutzenberger was charged Oct. 24 with injury to an elderly person, a third-degree felony, according to the sheriff's office. Salazar said his office is investigating additional charges of assaulting a poll worker.

Amid a “particularly contentious election cycle,” Salazar said he wanted to address the incident to “tone down the tone about what's going on out there.”

“Look, nothing here is worth getting hurt or going to jail,” Salazar said. “It makes no sense to take up a criminal case, to take up a criminal story – or to injure or even kill someone in the name of politics. It just doesn’t make sense.”

An attorney for the defendant told ABC News he was “honored to represent Mr. Lutzenberger, a U.S. Navy veteran.”

“We look forward to the opportunity to defend Jesse,” attorney Jonathan Watkins said in a statement. “We believe the facts of this case have been misrepresented by the local media.”

In the case of the Orangeburg County incident, the South Carolina Elections Division confirmed it was investigating but did not comment on an ongoing investigation.

Orangeburg County elections director Aurora Smalls said in a statement that the county is “working hard to ensure that elections are conducted safely and smoothly so that all eligible voters have the opportunity to participate in a fair and impartial election in accordance with state and federal regulations.” to comply with federal regulations.”

ABC News' Chris Boccia, Matt Foster and Kerem Inal contributed to this report.