The facts of life are that our society's ability to support the underclass is finite. The size of the underclass is growing.
Personally, I'd like to avoid a bloody civil war at the point that the economy finally collapses.
That's not accidental: the government is just like any other competitive organization. It wants to grow sales 10% every year without regard to environmental damage. Without the illegals, 25% of government workers would lose their jobs and the ponzi pension schemes would implode.
Having an improvident underclass burgeoning beyond the carrying capacity of all available support systems --- whether by illegal immigration (invasion) or by natural reproductive increase, or both --- is a real problem. But why would reproductive maiming of non-consenting women be the solution?
Wouldn't it just make more sense to strictly enforce existing immigration laws, eliminate the "hook" of "anchor babies," deport those who reside here unlawfully, and put a cap on every form of welfare benefit?
After that cap is reached, the options for the dependent mothers are: get a job or an income-producing gig, get a husband, avail yourself of the services provided by private charities (church-based and other non-profits), or relocate someplace else where the prospects are better.
Eliminate freeloading invaders; cap benefits; encourage whatever form of productivity or self-sufficiency people can manage. I've got all kinds of ideas on this (in short: a low-taxed, de-regulated gig economy which would re-install the bottom rungs of small entrepreneurship or workforce participation) but not enough time or space to elaborate the idea here.
All this is better, more conducive to an ordered and law-respecting society and more congenial to human liberty, than poisoning the drinking water with anti-fertility chemicals, or "treating" women against their will with Sangerite-Maoist-veterinary "medical" solutions.
This kind of respect for law and liberty is the very foundation of a free society.
Or so I have always believed.