Background 1. It is a condition for applying for admission to the US under the Visa Waiver Program that one waives one's right to appeal or contest any rejection by a border official. (In practice, air travelers are not asked to affirmatively waive these rights; I think it is in the small print of the ESTA application somewhere).
Background 2. Various report (e.g. here) state that US consulates are quite reluctant to issue B-1/B-2 visas to VWP nationals when it appears their travel purpose fits under the VWP.
Question. Suppose you apply for a visa and outright tell the consular officer that your reason for wanting a visa is to preserve your right to an immigration judge in case you're refused entry. Have you then effectively killed your application? Are there reports of this succeeding (surely someone must have tried just out of general boundary-pushing assitude)? Are there rules stating explicitly that such a desire is an acceptable reason to apply for a visa?
Never mind that it appears to be a stupidly pointless move for most bona fide tourists or business visitors to insist on full removal proceedings if rejected at the border -- since the law states that these rights must be waived instead of just declaring that you don't have them in the first place, the system should at least pretend that it's rational to want to preserve them, shouldn't it?