This is an era of many gutless federal courts, so I would sadly and reluctantly agree with you, AuH2ORepublican, that no court likely will "remove Obama from office because his father was not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born."
However, that is a different question than the one of the definition of "Natural Born Citizen." Contrary to your post, there is no new "prevalent interpretation of the NBC clause" (except perhaps by the leftist MSM). In all the cases litigated regarding Obama's constitutional qualifications for the presidency or lack thereof, federal courts have never had to reach the definition of "Natural Born Citizen" in order to dispose of these challenges. Rather, they have dismissed the constitutional challenges to Obama by ruling that the plaintiffs in these cases lacked standing. How convenient on their part, telling the plaintiffs, in essence: "Get out of my courtroom, who are you to challenge the legitimacy of the new Messiah?"
Standing?! Every US citizen should have standing. He is the acting commander in chief of the US armed forces, the executive branch of the US federal government, and it’s all paid for by US taxpayers. Every federal employee, especially members of the armed forces, should have standing. They ultimately take their orders from the President. The courts are not gutless. They are whores.