Fox News Host Tucker Carlson launched into a diatribe against refugees and undocumented immigrants during his show Tuesday night.

Carlson argued that being born in the United States should not grant citizenship if the child is born to undocumented immigrants before going on to decry refugees benefiting from public assistance. He mainly decried their use of SNAP benefits--which can only be acquired by undocumented immigrants if their children are born in the United States. Naturally, Carlson's next step was to argue for the end of birth right citizenship.

Carlson cited former Trump official Michael Anton's Washington Post article last month that argued to abolish citizenship as a birth right. Anton insisted that "an executive order could specify to federal agencies that the children of non-citizens are not citizens." Carlson echoes Anton in his segment, arguing

If it is true that the Constitution does not mandate citizenship for anyone born here regardless of status or the status of the parents, then why are we acting that that's the law?

The answer is because it is the law. The first clause of the 14th Amendment states:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.

Though many Republicans argue that the clause needs clarification, the Supreme Court has already determined what the clause means. Regardless, it cannot be revoked with an executive order. Nevertheless, Carlson used the assertion as fodder for why refugees should not be given assistance to provide food to their families. The only way for undocumented immigrants to receive SNAP benefits are if their children are born in the United States. Tucker Carlson--who has a net worth of $16 million--thinks that is too much of a luxury.

He still wasn't done shaming refugees and immigrants.

Carlson's main issue seems to be with refugees and undocumented immigrants receiving public benefits, but fails to address why a significantly greater number of American tax dollars goes towards corporate welfare--not social.

Many on Twitter were quick to decry his shaming of those using public assistance.

Some pointed out that investing in social welfare--which many argue could be afforded by a proportionally small cut from the bloated defense budget--would solve the problems against which Carlson was railing.

While Carlson may find the Fox News audience receptive to his erroneous arguments, many Americans are fed up with the elitism behind them.