Okay, so that's not "slow walking" or "doing the bare minimum"....so just to be clear, that's not evidence of your prior claim.

So are you moving the goalposts now?

Does that mean you're admitting that you don't have evidence of the prior claims?

And yet there are still people that think it's more important to protest vote than to actually make your vote count....all because of purity.

willingly refused to do its job

You can say they're not doing enough, but this is flatly false.

Let's keep the arguments grounded in reality here y'all.

So they haven't arrested, processed or deported anyone since Biden took office?

Because it sounds like you're just saying that you don't think they're doing enough, but that's different from "willfully refusing to do their job".

Show me actual evidence of what you claim, that the administration is intentionally slow-walking and doing the bare minimum.

Because I'm going to be honest, this sounds like usual election year hyperbole that people believe without actual evidence.

As far as I can tell, the only thing that Biden has done is not be actively hateful towards migrants, which according to the right creates an "open invitation".

No, because the left is a "big tent" that is full of purists who refuse to vote if the Dem candidate isn't sufficiently pure on certain positions.

What HAS he done to help the border?

His administration has continued to enforce federal law by deporting people who migrate illegally, process asylum claims and generally execute their responsibilities.

What are they not doing?

He hasn't used his bully pulpit to push the senate to pass HR2 which already passed the house and needs a mere 10 votes from Dems.

So we're blaming Biden for Congress' failure to deal with the issue? I notice you only bring up HR2 and not the bipartisan bill that passed the Senate and had GOP support until Trump insisted that it die so that they could keep campaigning on the "crisis".

He has issued no executive orders.

Wasn't the use of executive orders to create policy generally seen as a negative?

I can absolutely see California doing it just to spite this ruling, didn't they do something similar on gun control a few years ago to point out the absurd results of certain legal reasoning?

I like how you didn't actually answer my question about what the administration is not doing that is in it's remit to do.

The fact that the American people (most of whom don't understand separation of powers at all) blame the president for everything doesn't mean that you can lean on that as if it's a logical argument.