U.S. 21, 32, 103 S.Ct. 321, 74 L.Ed.2d 21 (1982). It is “beyond peradventure” that “unadmitted and nonresident aliens” have no right to be admitted to the United States. Adams v. Baker, 909 F.2d 643, 647 (1st Cir. 1990). There is no constitutionally protected interest in either obtaining or continuing to possess a visa. The due process guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment “attaches only when the federal government seeks to deny a liberty or property interest.” Knoetze v. U.S., Dep’t of State, 634 F.2d 207, 211 (5th Cir. 1981). A non-citizen has no “inherent property right in an immigrant visa.” Azizi v. Thornburgh, 908 F.2d 1130, 1134 (2d Cir. 1990); see also Legal Assistance for Vietnamese Asylum Seekers v. Dep’t of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs, 104 F.3d 1349, 1354 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (<HOLDING>); Knoetze, 634 F.2d at 212 (concluding that
holding that we had jurisdiction and granting aliens petition where the bia unlawfully relied on the nonviability of the aliens marriage in denying her application for adjustment of status holding that the fifth amendment did not apply to tribal government holding that aliens in deportation hearings enjoy due process protections under the fifth amendment holding that aliens may not assert a fifth amendment right in challenging the procedures for granting immigrant visas holding that the statement ill take the fifth was an assertion of the fifth amendment privilege