Roksandic et al. (2022 a) established Homo bodoensis with Bodo 1 as the holotype. They argued the taxon is necessary to represent the lineage leading up to Homo sapiens after the split from the last common ancestor with Neanderthals and Denisovans. Roksandic et al. (2022) included "Kabwe 1 (Broken Hill), Ndutu, Saldanha (Elandsfontein), Ngaloba (LH 18) and potentially Salé in Africa" in the hypodigm for the Homo bodoensis (p. 6). Of these specimens, Kabwe, and Saldanha are types for available names that would have priority over Homo bodoensis. Kabwe (Broken Hill, E686) is the type for Homo rhodesiensis Woodward, 1921, while Saldanha is the type for Homo saldanensis Drenan, 1955. Roksandic et al. (2022 a) specifically addressed the priority of Homo rhodesiensis, arguing the latter name should be suppressed because "(1) the taxon is poorly defined and variably understood and used; and (2) the taxon name is associated with sociopolitical baggage that our scientific community is trying to dissociate itself from." Specifically, Roksandic et al. (2022) argued that Homo rhodesiensis should not be used because of its association with the colonialist Cecil Rhodes.
Delson and Stringer (2022) in a response, noted that the formal suppression of names should be accomplished by a petition to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). They further indicated that Homo rhodesiensis is named with reference to the territory of Rhodesia (Rhodesia was not recognized as a country until 1980 when it was internationally recognized as Zimbabwe) rather than the person Cecil Rhodes. In their view Homo bodoensis is a junior replacement name for Homo rhodesiensis under the Code.
In another response, Sarmiento and Pickford (2022) noted that if Homo rhodesiensis is bypassed then Homo saldanensis retains priority.
In a later reply Roksandic et al. (2022 b) argued that Homo saldanensis is a nomen nudum because it fails to include apomorphic traits that diagnose the species. For additional comments see the entry for Homo saldanensis.
Homo bodoensis meets the requirements put forth by the Code however it is a junior replacement name to Homo rhodesiensis or Homo saldanensis both of which are available and potentially valid under the Code. Whether one chooses to acknowledge the propriety of the Code with regard to these names is another matter.