As Granite Staters go to the polls on Tuesday for the most heated, partisan election in decades, voters will be faced with more than the choices on the ballot.

For many who have proudly displayed their party allegiance in the form of a button or support for a candidate on a hat or T-shirt, they will face the possibility of a standoff with election workers after a new bill was signed into law here.

The new measure bans campaign clothing at the polls after moderators complained to the secretary of state’s office about a lack of clarity in state statutes. While New Hampshire has always banned electioneering at the polls, voters have declined to remove shirts, hats or other items because it was not illegal in the state to wear them.

But Deputy Secretary of State David M. Scanlan told The Telegraph a week before Election Day that if a voter was wearing a hat with Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s "Make America Great Again" slogan, the individual would have to remove it before casting a ballot.

"It’s no different than holding a sign that says ‘Make America Great Again,’?" Scanlan said. People wearing campaign-themed items at the polls will be asked to remove those items or turn them inside out, he said.

Those who refuse will still be allowed to vote, but the moderators were encouraged to report violators to the attorney general’s office. This, of course, leaves open the possibility of people flaunting the law, potentially giving license for voters on Nov. 8 to create havoc.

The most pivotal case in speech and voting is the Burson v. Freeman case in 1992, in which the Supreme Court approved a 100-foot campaign-free zone around polling sites. In that decision, the court decided "a substantial consensus" and "simple common sense" demonstrated some restricted zone around polling locations is imperative to protect voting rights, and requiring solicitors to stand at least 100 feet from entrances "does not constitute an unconstitutional compromise."

So you now have the argument in New Hampshire: If a 100-foot buffer is constitutional under the Burson ruling, why wouldn’t the state’s new law also pass a judicial review that creates a safe and comfortable voting environment in a choppy election cycle?

Perhaps there is nothing more American than calling upon Henry David Thoreau’s "Civil Disobedience" while selecting one’s federal and state representatives. But in this case, Tuesday is not the right time to stage objections over a trivial law about clothing – it is a time for Americans to exercise their constitutional right to vote.

There’s more at stake than being able to wear a T-shirt.