The School Board of the city of Rulb issued a rule authorizing public school principals to punish, after a hearing, students who engage in violations of the board's student behavior code. According to the rule, violators of the behavior code may be punished in a variety of ways including being required to sit in designated school confinement rooms during all school hours, with their hands clasped in front of them, for a period of up to 15 school days. Teddy, a fifth grade student in Rulb Elementary School, was charged with placing chewed bubble gum on a classmate's chair, a violation of the student behavior code. He had never violated the code before and was otherwise an attentive and well-behaved student. After a hearing on the charges, Teddy's principal determined that Teddy had violated the behavior code in the manner charged, and ordered Teddy to spend the next 15 school days in the school confinement room with his hands clasped in front of him. Teddy's parents file suit in federal court challenging, solely on constitutional grounds, the principal's action in ordering Teddy to spend the next 15 school days in the school confinement room with his hands clasped in front of him. Which of the following arguments would be most helpful to Teddy's parents in this suit? 
Because the school board rule limits the freedom of movement of students and subjects them to bodily restraint, it denies them a privilege and immunity of citizenship guaranteed them by Article IV, Section 2.  Because the school board rule is substantially overbroad in relation to any legitimate purpose, it constitutes a facial violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Because application of the school board rule in this case denies the student freedom of movement and subjects him to bodily restraint in a manner grossly disproportionate to his offense and circumstances, it violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Because the school board rule is enforced initially by administrative rather than judicial proceedings, it constitutes a prohibited bill of attainder. 