Millions of people have voted no incidents so far choice. Although in some reported cases there have been problems with what voters wear to the polls.

With advance vote ongoing in Bexar County, Texas, Sheriff Javier Salazar told reporters recently that there have been several cases of voters wearing “inappropriate clothing” in support of a political candidate.

“This is an election campaign, and it’s definitely something you shouldn’t do,” Salazar said at a news conference last month.

Things “got ugly” in one case last month, he said, when he was a man allegedly punched a 69-year-old poll worker at an early voting location in San Antonio. The altercation occurred while the man was being escorted off the scene 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 in my time here as sheriff,” Salazar said.

MORE: Texas man arrested for allegedly punching poll worker who told him to take off his political hat

At an early voting location in Orangeburg County, South Carolina, last week, a poll worker and a voter got into an altercation after the voter was told to remove his “Let’s Go Brandon” hat, according to a police report and a video of the incident.

In the video, the man can be heard saying: “It’s my right (expletive)” as he holds the hat up, before throwing it away. During the altercation, a survey employee allegedly punched the man in the face, according to the incident report. The employer 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 campaigning or any activity intended to influence the vote in an election.

Every state has restrictions on election activities in some form near polling places, “such as limiting the display of signs, the distribution of campaign materials, or the solicitation of votes from a predetermined distance (usually between 50 and 200 feet) of a polling station”, according to the data. THE National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).

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

These 21 states have statutes restricting campaign clothing — such as shirts, hats and buttons — at polling places, according to the 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 statute provides. However, the organization advises voters to check with their local election official, as the implementation of election laws can vary from state to state.

For example, in addition to those 21 states, Massachusetts prohibits “the wearing of certain political apparel (T-shirts, hats, buttons, pins, stickers, etc.)” within 150 yards of a polling place, according to a Electoral opinion from 2024. 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 notice.

In addition, Wisconsin election workers are advised that “politically themed clothing or materials/clothing/buttons supporting a candidate, political party or ballot initiative” are not allowed at the polls, according to training materials for electoral workers.

Restrictions on political dress could also extend to political references beyond candidates or issues on the ballot.

For example, in Texas, “it is prohibited to participate in elections, including expressing preference for or against any political candidate, measure, or party, whether or not on the ballot or in connection with the conduct of an election.” the Texas secretary of state said in a recent notice.

MORE: Early voting options grow in popularity, campaign reconfiguration and vote preparation

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

“In many states, they’re responding to times when voters have been more intimidated at the polls or more influenced,” he told ABC News. “They responded to the potential for these types of activities to have a greater influence on lesser-known breeds.”

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

Penalties for violating election laws could include fines or jail time, although people are usually required to remove or cover any political items in order to vote.

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

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

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

One The 1992 decisionThe Supreme Court found that a Tennessee law restricting political campaigning within 30 feet of a polling place did not violate the First Amendment.

One 2018 decisionThe high court found that Minnesota’s law banning political clothing at polling places was overbroad 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 the Tea Party logo and a button advocating photo ID voting requirements.

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

In Texas, a woman sued after she was forced to turn a T-shirt in support of a ballot measure inside out while voting in the 2018 election. The complaint alleged that the state’s election laws unconstitutionally froze her the right to freedom of expression and that enforcement was inconsistent. The laws were ultimately upheld by an 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 applied by volunteers who are election workers who may not even have had much training on how to do it, or in one county they might have been well trained and in another county, other people they are not well prepared,” he said.

Huefner said eliminating any differential enforcement is critical, while urging voters to “give some grace” to poll volunteers.

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

MORE: Election 2024: How to track your ballot and what to do if it’s been damaged

In the Texas incident cited by the Bexar County Sheriff, Jesse Lutzenberger, 63, was arrested Oct. 24 for injury to an elderly person, a third-degree felony, according to the sheriff’s office. Salazar said his office is looking into additional charges for assaulting a poll worker.

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

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

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

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

In the incident in Orangeburg County, South Carolina elections The division confirmed it was investigating but would not comment on an open investigation.

Orangeburg County Elections Director Aurora Smalls said in a statement that the county “works hard to ensure that 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.

Can you wear a Trump or Harris hat to the polls? It depends where you live originally appeared on abcnews.go.com