Read this excerpt from “schenck v. u. s., 249 u. s. 47 (1919)" and answer the question that follows:

the document in question upon its first printed side recited the first section of the thirteenth amendment, said that the idea embodied in it was violated by the conscription act and that a conscript is little better than a convict. in impassioned language it intimated that conscription was despotism in its worst form and a monstrous wrong against humanity in the interest of wall street's chosen few. it said, 'do not submit to intimidation,' but in form at least confined itself to peaceful measures such as a petition for the repeal of the act. the other and later printed side of the sheet was headed 'assert your rights.' it stated reasons for alleging that any one violated the constitution when he refused to recognize 'your right to assert your opposition to the draft,' and went on, 'if you do not assert and support your rights, you are to deny or disparage rights which it is the solemn duty of all citizens and residents of the united states to retain.' it described the arguments on the other side as coming from cunning politicians and a mercenary capitalist press, and even silent consent to the conscription law as to support an infamous conspiracy.

according to the protest document, what violates the constitution?

failure to consent to conscription
confining oneself to peaceful measures
petitioning for a repeal of the conscription act
failure to assert and support your rights