Millions of people have cast their votes without incident so far this election. Although in some reported cases there have been issues with what voters wear to the polls.

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

“That is election campaigning, and it is certainly something you should not do,” Salazar said at a news conference last month.

Things got “ugly” 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 from the premises after he was asked to remove a political hat, Salazar said. 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.

At an early voting location in Orangeburg County, South Carolina, a poll worker and a voter got into an altercation last week 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 (power) right,” as he holds up the hat before throwing it away. Amid the altercation, a poll worker allegedly punched the man in the face, the incident report said. 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 electoral activities, or any activity intended to influence voting in elections.

Every state has restrictions on election activities in some form near polling places, “such as limiting the display of signs, distributing campaign literature, or soliciting votes within a predetermined distance (typically 50 to 200 feet) from a polling station,” said the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).

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

These 21 states have statutes that restrict campaign clothing — such as shirts, hats and buttons — at 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 is stated in the articles of association. However, the organization advises voters to contact their local election official as implementation of election laws can vary within a state.

In addition to these 21 states, Massachusetts, for example, 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 materials that include a candidate’s name or face on the ballot and slogans “closely associated with or actively used by candidates and campaigns,” the advisory body said.

According to their respective secretaries of state, political attire is not allowed at polling places in Missouri, Georgia and Louisiana. Elections are prohibited within 25 feet of a polling place in Missouri, within 150 feet in Georgia and within 600 feet in Louisiana.

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

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

For example, in Texas, it is illegal to conduct any election, including expressing preference for or against any candidate, measure, or political party, whether or not they are on the ballot or related to the conduct of an election. the Texas Secretary of State said in a recent advisory.

Election laws have a “long history,” said Steven Huefner, a law professor at Ohio State University.

“In many states, they are responding to times when voters were more intimidated or influenced in the election,” he told ABC News. “They were responding to the potential for these types of activities to have more impact on the lesser-known breeds.”

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

Penalties for violating election laws can include fines or jail time, although people are typically asked to remove or conceal political items in order to vote.

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

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

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

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

In a 2018 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Minnesota’s law banning political attire at voting locations 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 a Tea Party logo and a button advocating voting requirements with a photo ID.

Today, Minnesota bans “campaign t-shirts, buttons or literature that relate to specific candidates, official political parties or voting questions about that day’s vote” at polling places, according to the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office.

In Texas, a woman was charged after having to turn a pro-ballot T-shirt inside out during a 2018 election. The complaint alleged that the state’s election 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 polling places and precincts, which could lead to confusion.

“It’s often enforced by volunteers who are poll workers and may not even have had much training on how to handle this, or in one county they may be well trained and in another county other people may not be well trained,” he said .

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

“Volunteers have been experiencing some pretty persistent, unfortunate attacks lately, all undeserved,” he said. “They perform this vital public service.”

In the Texas incident cited by the Bexar County Sheriff’s Office, 63-year-old Jesse Lutzenberger was arrested on Oct. 24 for battery on an elderly person, a third-degree felony, the sheriff’s office said. Salazar said his office is investigating additional charges of assaulting an election worker.

Amid a “particularly contentious election cycle,” Salazar said he wanted to address the incident to “lower the tone of what’s happening out there.”

“Look, nothing here is worth getting hurt or going to jail,” Salazar said. “There’s no point in pursuing a criminal case, a criminal record, or injuring or even killing someone in the name of politics. It just doesn’t make any sense.”

An attorney for the defendant told ABC News that he is “honored to represent Mr. Lutzenberger, a veteran of the United States 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 Orangeburg County incident, the South Carolina Elections Department confirmed it is investigating but would not comment on an open 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, giving 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.