The conversation about immigration adjudication has shifted from one detailing shortcomings to one addressing solutions. When formulating solutions, it is important to look beyond any one contributor to the crisis and to promote a holistic view. Recent proposals for immigration adjudication reform acknowledge that fixing the system requires a multi-faceted approach. This article confirms the need for such an approach by showing how one popular cause of the crisis - a lack of decisional independence - only scratches the surface of what ails the immigration adjudication system. Along the way, the article uncovers and evaluates underappreciated crisis contributors.

While decisional independence is crucial, it is vital to understand and to emphasize that achieving decisional independence will not fix all of what ails immigration adjudication. Focusing attention away from this one factor reveals five other substantial contributors to the shortcomings of immigration adjudication: substantive immigration law; the conflicting signals of immigration adjudication; the lack of de facto independence; the use of diversions from the system; and weakened judicial review. If these other contributors are not addressed, any reform likely will produce disappointing results.