Standard approaches to causal inference, such as Outcome Regression and Inverse Probability Weighted Regression Adjustment (IPWRA), are typically derived through the lens of missing data imputation and identification theory. In this work, we unify these methods from a Machine Learning perspective, reframing ATE estimation as a \textit{domain adaptation problem under distribution shift}. We demonstrate that the canonical Hajek estimator is a special case of IPWRA restricted to a constant hypothesis class, and that IPWRA itself is fundamentally Importance-Weighted Empirical Risk Minimization designed to correct for the covariate shift between the treated sub-population and the target population. Leveraging this unified framework, we critically examine the optimization objectives of Doubly Robust estimators. We argue that standard methods enforce \textit{sufficient but not necessary} conditions for consistency by requiring outcome models to be individually unbiased. We define the true "ATE Risk Function" and show that minimizing it requires only that the biases of the treated and control models structurally cancel out. Exploiting this insight, we propose the \textbf{Joint Robust Estimator (JRE)}. Instead of treating propensity estimation and outcome modeling as independent stages, JRE utilizes bootstrap-based uncertainty quantification of the propensity score to train outcome models jointly. By optimizing for the expected ATE risk over the distribution of propensity scores, JRE leverages model degrees of freedom to achieve robustness against propensity misspecification. Simulation studies demonstrate that JRE achieves up to a 15\% reduction in MSE compared to standard IPWRA in finite-sample regimes with misspecified outcome models.