Whether Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is famous or infamous around the country for his often public and sometimes extreme approaches to law enforcement depends largely on whom you ask.
Regardless, his recent comments on a case before three judges from the Arizona Court of Appeals have us glad that he's not also a doctor.
The case involves an imprisoned woman who wanted to get an abortion. Since 2005, Arpaio's policy has been to require all women to get court orders in order to have their pregnancy terminated.
"Where should I draw the line?" Arpaio told The Arizona Republic. "Should I transport women who want to change their face or men who want other types of operations on a volunteer, elective basis?"
Right. So, a woman's Supreme Court-supported right to an abortion is the same as her right to a nose job and a man's right to a little liposuction.
Arpaio's other argument was that women seeking abortions were costing taxpayers money. Even though the women have to pay for the abortions themselves, the state has to transport them to the clinic.
Even with rising gas prices, we find it dubious that the state has to pay a significantly higher amount of money for the transportation than they would have to pay for the court fees involved in the women obtaining the necessary court order.
The court orders themselves also take up to seven weeks to obtain - meaning a jailed pregnant woman who might have been contemplating an abortion might not be able to get an order in time for a safe, legal abortion.
Arpaio's personal beliefs, which he has publicly stated place him squarely against abortion, don't disqualify him from holding a public office, nor should they.
However, it's hard to believe that the court-order requirement for abortion is anything less than a subterfuge intended to prevent abortions by what should be ruled extra-legal means.
Just as many are quick to criticize judges making controversial rulings as "activists," we should not be wary to call out all public officials who try to circumvent the rule of law by subtle nuance.
The debate over abortion should continue to be waged in the courthouse, by lawyers and judges, and not by sheriffs or other officials entrusted to uphold - and just as importantly, respect - the law.
