Can you wear a Trump or Harris hat to the polls? It depends on where you live

Millions of people have cast their ballots without incident so far this election. Though in some reported cases there have been issues with what voters are wearing to the polls.

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

“That’s electioneering, and it’s certainly something that you’re not supposed to do,” Salazar said at a press briefing last month.

Things “got ugly” in one instance last month, he said, when a man allegedly punched a 69-year-old poll worker at an early voting site in San Antonio. The altercation occurred while the man was being escorted out of the site after being asked to remove a political hat, according to Salazar. The man was wearing a red “MAGA” or “Trump” baseball cap, according to an incident report.

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

At an early voting location in Orangeburg County, South Carolina, last week, a poll worker and voter got into an altercation after the voter was told 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 tossing it. Amid 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 restricting forms of political activities in or near polling places to prohibit electioneering, or any activity intended to influence voting at an election.

Every state has restrictions on electioneering in some form near polling sites, “such as limiting the display of signs, handing out campaign literature or soliciting votes within a pre-determined distance (typically 50 to 200 feet) of a polling place,” according to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).

Nearly half of states, including Texas and South Carolina, have statutes restricting what you can wear to vote, according to NCSL.

These 21 states have statutes restricting campaign apparel — like shirts, hats and buttons — in polling places, according to NCSL: 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 what the statutes state. The organization advises voters to check with their local election official, though, as implementation of electioneering laws can vary within a state.

For instance, in addition to those 21 states, Massachusetts prohibits “wearing certain political apparel (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 containing the name or face of any candidate on the ballot and slogans “that are closely aligned with or actively used by candidates and campaigns,” according to the advisory.

Political attire is not allowed at polling sites in Missouri and Georgia, according to their respective secretary of state’s offices. Electioneering is prohibited within 25 feet of a polling place in Missouri, and within 150 feet in Georgia.

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

The restrictions on political apparel could extend to political references beyond the candidates or issues on the ballot.

For instance, in Texas, “it is prohibited to electioneer, including expressing preference for or against any candidate, measure, or political party, regardless of whether they are or are not on the ballot, or relating to the conduct of an election,” the Texas Secretary of State said in an recent advisory.

Electioneering laws have a “long history,” according to Ohio State University law professor Steven Huefner.

“In many states, they respond to times when voters were more intimidated at the polls or more influenced,” he told ABC News. “They responded to the potential that these types of activity have more influence on the less well-known races.”

He said voters may not be aware they exist in their state “unless they had it happen to them or unless they’re an election junkie.”

Penalties for violating electioneering laws could include fines or imprisonment, though people are typically asked to remove or cover up any political items in order to vote.

Some voters may view restrictions on electioneering as suppressing their First Amendment rights, Huefner noted.

“This really is a very narrow and selective exception to that based on the desire to keep the election process as secure as possible,” he said. “Secure includes preventing campaigns and their supporters from improperly influencing people as they vote.”

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

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

In a 2018 decision, the high court did find that Minnesota’s law barring political apparel at voting sites was too broad and violated the First Amendment. A voter filed the lawsuit after he was temporarily prevented from voting in 2010 because he was wearing a T-shirt with a Tea Party logo and a button that advocated for photo ID voting requirements.

Today, Minnesota prohibits “campaign t-shirts, buttons or literature which relate to specific candidates, official political parties, or ballot questions on the ballot that day” in polling places, according to the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office.

In Texas, a woman sued after she had to turn a T-shirt in support of a ballot measure inside out while voting in a 2018 election. The complaint argued that the state’s electioneering laws unconstitutionally chilled her right to free speech and that enforcement was inconsistent. The laws were ultimately upheld by the appeals court after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

Huefner said enforcement of the restrictions “can be quite inconsistent” between poll workers or polling places, which can lead to confusion.

“It’s often being enforced by volunteers who are poll workers who may not even have had much training about how to handle this, or in one county might have been well-trained and in another county, other people aren’t well-trained,” he said.

Huefner said eliminating any differential enforcement is key, while also urging voters to “extend some grace” to volunteers at polling places.

“Volunteers have really been under some pretty sustained, unfortunate attacks of late, and all of it undeserved,” he said. “They are performing this critical public service.”

In the Texas incident cited by the Bexar County sheriff, 63-year-old Jesse Lutzenberger was booked on Oct. 24 on injury to an elderly person, a third-degree felony, according to the sheriff’s office. Salazar said his office was looking into additional charges for assault on an election worker.

Amid an “especially contentious election cycle,” Salazar said he wanted to address the incident to “bring down the tone of what’s going on out there.”

“Look, nothing here is worth getting hurt or going to jail for,” Salazar said. “There’s no sense picking up a criminal case, picking up a criminal history — or injuring or even killing somebody in the name of politics. It just doesn’t make any sense.”

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

“We are eager for our opportunity to defend Jesse,” the attorney, Jonathan Watkins, said in a statement. “We feel the facts of this case have been mischaracterized by local media.”

In the Orangeburg County incident, the South Carolina Elections Division confirmed it is investigating but would not comment on an open probe.

The Orangeburg County election director, Aurora Smalls, said in a statement that the county “works hard to ensure elections are safe, secure, and run smoothly allowing all eligible voters the opportunity to vote in fair and impartial elections in accordance with state and federal regulations.”

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