In her "speech after being convicted of voting," susan b. anthony uses several historical sources to support her argument about women's right to vote. describe two of the sources she uses, and explain how those sources contribute to her point of view. be sure to use specific details from the text to support your ideas.

She infers the most important one. It is a cruel injustice to deny women the right to vote. She says it is an oligarchy based on gender which translated means that women and enslaved by the men in her household. She is not respected as mother. She is not respected as sister or as wife as long as she is not equal to men.
She makes 2 references to the Federal Constitution held to be so important to all Americans.
The first is that the constitution begins with "We the People." Who is we? How is 'we' defined? Does it mean everyone or does it mean just males. History would say most of the time it means just males.
The second reference is a good deal more complex and uses legal jargon. It is an  ex post facto  law. This is a law that makes it a crime for acting in a legal way. She also uses the term attainder in the same sentence which is the abolishment of a citizen's  civil rights after committing a felony. What she means is that any state that passes a law that prohibits half the population from voting is committing an attainder or a ex post facto law, which the constitution expressly forbids.
I think one of the things worth noting is that she committed the felony in the 1872 election (voting illegally), and women did not receive the vote until 1920. That's nearly 48 years between her act and what she was aiming to accomplish. She did not live to see her life's work come to fruition.