– what is meant by “cleared” & how far from the planet must the orbit be cleared?

“it has become gravitationally dominant, and there are no other bodies of comparable size other than its own satellites or those otherwise under its gravitational influence“. IIRC I’ve seen a paper clearly outlining why the planets stands out from the rest on this account, so it is very well defined.

My initial problem with the planet definition is that exoplanets and plutoids was left hanging (pun intended), but it seems they have cleared that up now. I liked the initial definition better as it was simpler and more general; but it is only a classification system after all.

It could be worse – think of the taxonomists who must change groups reclassify the phylogeny, yet must stick to stable species names, just because they want to see priority and follow a more rigid paper trail. “The first published description of a species fixes the species epithet; if the species is later moved to another genus, it retains the first-published epithet unless that would create a homonym.” Yet, “In the interests of stability of nomenclature, the rule of priority can be reversed if a junior name has been used very widely and for a long period of time.” [Wikipedia.]

So Apat-osaurus instead of Bronto-saurus: “In 1877, Othniel Charles Marsh published the name of the type species Apatosaurus ajax. He followed this in 1879 with a description of another, more complete specimen, which he thought represented a new genus and named Brontosaurus excelsus. In 1903, Elmer Riggs pointed out it that Brontosaurus excelsus was in fact so similar to Apatosaurus ajax that it belonged in the same genus, and which Riggs re-classified as Apatosaurus excelsus. According to the rules of the ICZN (which governs the scientific names of animals), the name Apatosaurus, having been published first, had priority as the official name; Brontosaurus was a junior synonym and therefore discarded from formal use. [Wikipedia.]” Makes you go “apat hic”, doesn’t it?]

Meanwhile molecular biologists do the reasonable thing and use data bases to keep track of biochemicals, whatever their current classification. So the same gene can have a funny and memorable name if sequenced in a fly, while a boring alphanumerical code if sequenced in a human or a yeast.

By your definition (and apparently BA’s), the other 4 members of the Court hate habeas corpus, too, along with a lot of other Americans. In fact, there is a significant body of legal opinion that suggests that habeas corpus MAY not extend to the kinds of detainees in question (not just Gonzalez’).

Disagreeing with a ruling is a far cry from “hating” habeas corpus, or wanting to do away with it on a whim.

Nuance? How ’bout Obama’s 57 states? Or does he get a “pass” on that one?