David Davis has united the political commentators. Almost as one, pundits in newspaper columns and on the airwaves have pronounced him selfish, scheming and possibly bonkers.
But there is some evidence to suggest the media is out of touch with the public mood on this issue.
Some polls this weekend showed that many voters believed Mr Davis was taking a principled stand - and this was something they admired.
Let us consider the evidence. Mr Davis yesterday insisted he would "never run for the Tory leadership again".
That's about as clear as can be. There was no talk about "I cannot foresee the circumstances" or "there is no vacancy" - just a straightforward "no, never".
Indeed, it would be rather odd if Mr Davis was angling for the Conservative leadership at this point in time.
The Tories could very well win a general election under David Cameron in two years time, in which case Mr Cameron will stay on for, one assumes, at least four years.
But even if the Conservatives lose, there's no guarantee Mr Cameron would go. It would depend on the scale of the loss, and whether the Tories have the good sense to remember that in 2005 - when Mr Cameron became leader - their chances of winning an election looked slim to non-existent.
It's frequently said that Mr Davis is ambitious, and that seems hard to dispute.
But is it possible that other factors drive Mr Davis as well? After all, giving up the chance to become Home Secretary is hardly the action of somebody motivated solely by relentless ambition.
The reality may be more complicated. Mr Davis is known as a man with enormous confidence and self-belief, and sometimes this has given the impression that he is concerned with his own self-advancement.
But he is also exactly the type of person who could be just as happy on the back benches as in the Cabinet, if he was free to speak his mind. He's not driven by status.
Sometimes, even in politics, things can be exactly what they seem to be. It's possible that the explanation for Mr Davis' actions is simply that he feels so strongly about arange of civil liberties issues that he felt compelled to take a stand.
Certainly, this is what at least some voters appear to believe, despite the more cynical interpretation offered by the media. Perhaps they are right.