Agreed — the laws that I’m familiar with relate only to candidate or proposition advocacy. Nothing contained in the constitution would run afoul of those restrictions.
What is the compelling government interest in allowing such censorship? That is yet another element that Supreme Courts have examined. Just exactly what is at risk if a person wearing a shirt that supports a candidate appears at a voting place?
If a person chooses to have a candidate's name tattooed on his forehead does he forfeit his right to vote? Must he cover his face? Why not insist that people who can't tolerate seeing such advocacy avert their vision?
Perhaps we could have special voting precincts set up for those who can't tolerate free expression?