clarification about the definition of "Rights to Ought Fallacy"

The definition of "Rights to Ought Fallacy" starts with: "When one gives a reason for one's rights (constitutional or other) with what one should do". I don't get it the way it is written. Is it syntactically correct? What I understand the meaning to be is something along the lines of "When one conflates one's rights with what one should do". But I can't say I understand what you meant as it is written. Can you explain?