The same as it was September 17th, 1787. But of course your latter post abandon's the question of Natural born citizenship and goes to just citizenship. I think it's fair to say that one who is not qualified as a "citizen at birth" is also not qualified under any possible 1787 understanding of "Natural born citizen". The opposite is not true, that is there may well be people who qualify as citizens at birth, who do not qualify as "natural born". I don't think any of those cases will apply to BHO however. The reason I think that is because I think a good lawyer could make the case that anyone actually born in the US is a natural born citizen of the US, especially with one US Citizen parent, even if that person were also qualified as a citizen by birth of some other country. And I think Obama knows that, and would present certified proof to a court if he had been born in Hawaii or elsewhere in the US. He hasn't done so, and it would be both easier and much cheaper to do that, than hire lawyers to prevent him from being forced to do so. Thus I think there is something disqualifying on his BC, and being born outside the US is about the only thing I can think of that it could be. But then maybe I don't have a good enough imagination. :)