Walter E. Williams is a professor at George Mason University. I am not overly familiar with Williams' work, but some others have brought it to my attention recently as a result of Williams' support for the Arizona Law against illegal immigration. I presume that Williams backs the law, since his most recent essay argues that we should "start strict enforcement of immigration law, as Arizona has begun."

In his essay, Williams also lays out arguments regarding why the popular position on illegal immigration, one that supports amnesty, might be a bit of an illogical contradiction. In fact, Williams' point of view reflects the sentiment of many African Americans in disagreement with black leadership on the issue.

The professor starts by asking Libertarians - and those who think that illegal immigrants should receive amnesty - whether or not everyone on earth has a right to live in the United States. Many of us would argue that it would be impossible for every person on earth to live in the United States, since our nation can't sustain that many people. He then goes on to ask who gets to decide which people should live here. Obviously, the answer would be us, U.S. citizens.

Williams goes on to ask what the conditions for living in the United States should be and who has the right to ignore those conditions. Finally, there is the question of how we should respond when those conditions are ignored. Williams had this to say:

"When crimes are committed, what should be done? Some people recommend amnesia, which turns out to be the root word for amnesty. But surely they don't propose it as a general response to crime where criminals confess their crime, pay some fine and apply to have their crimes overlooked. Amnesty supporters probably wish amnesty to apply to only illegal immigrants. That being the case, one wonders whether they wish it to apply to illegals past, present and future, regardless of race, ethnicity or country of origin."

Translation of Williams' argument: Not everyone can live in the United States, and we must set standards for who lives here and how. If people ignore those standards, there should be a penalty. By expecting amnesty for the 10- to- 20-million illegal immigrants currently living in America, we are ignoring the standards and the penalties altogether.

Some believe that Professor Williams is correct. There may be an inherent contradiction in the fact that someone can break the law via illegal immigration and receive no penalty, yet no such argument would be accepted for those who are convicted of burglary. Another argument, however, is that the law is arbitrarily enforced in many cases all throughout America: Defendants appear before the judge with the same accusation and walk away with different sentences. Some of these charges are thrown out altogether.

Williams also refutes the argument that it would be impossible to arrest and/or deport every illegal resident currently living in the United States. Again, he makes a very clear point that this argument would not apply for almost any other serious crime. Williams says that incarcerating some illegal residents and/or deporting them might serve as a deterrent to others who might consider doing the same thing.

When it comes to the complex topic of illegal immigration, there appears to be a battle between pragmatism and idealism. From a pragmatic standpoint, Latin American residents are starting to form an overwhelming proportion of our nation's population. With that political power comes the ability to shape laws and bend rules in your favor. A political leader is far less likely to enforce a law against a powerful coalition than they are to enforce that same law against a weaker group of people (i.e., notice how Obama took a very strong public stance against the Arizona law, but says almost nothing about alarming levels of black male incarceration that have drawn the attention of human rights watchdogs around the world). This reminds us of the inherent truth that all laws are arbitrarily created in the first place. America has ignored illegal immigration for such a long time that they are now going to be forced to confront the massive political coalitions that have been formed by those who may have come to the U.S. legally and otherwise.

The other dividing line is between those who simply believe in helping the world by opening our borders vs. those who don't care nearly as much. America is the richest country in the world, and some would argue that we can afford to allow others to freely enter our nation to take advantage of our economic opportunities. They empathize with those who come to the United States in search of a better life for their families and feel that these struggles should be taken in to consideration when discussing our nation's response to illegal immigration. There are others, on the other hand, who feel that if we continue to let everyone share our piece of the economic pie, we'll eventually starve ourselves to death.

Personally, I've found myself in the middle on this issue. It makes no sense for our nation to ignore and arbitrarily apply laws for some groups, while strictly enforcing the law upon others. While the Arizona law is certainly disturbing, it has at least pressured the Obama Administration to act, rather than remain in a constant state of political procrastination on such an important issue. Simultaneously, I am a Democrat for a reason, and it is certainly not because it benefits me financially. Democrats support more public spending and higher tax rates on people like myself. I am a Democrat, because I care about my fellow man and support the idea of the United States being a good global citizen. Therefore, I believe in the idea of giving amnesty to undocumented residents and wiping the slate clean. In fact, there really isn't any other practical option.

But while I expect my own position to be respected, I reject the idea of reducing all opposing opinions to being nothing more than racist banter. The citizens of Arizona who support their peculiar law are not all racists and don't hate all black and brown people. Many of them are Americans who expect the law to be applied fairly as it is written on the books. The United States government has refused to do that, and seems to think that its citizens are going to sit quietly while they fall asleep at the wheel. Sorry, my friends, it doesn't work that way. It's time to create an immigration policy that actually makes sense.



Dr. Boyce Watkins is the founder of the Your Black World Coalition and the author of the new book, "Black American Money." To have Dr. Boyce commentary delivered to your email, please click here.