You asked:  "WHAT IS THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE NDAA?"

Here's the simple answer.  It is NOT capable of becoming LAW, it is unconstitutional:

PROOF THE NDAA IS A HOAX: — when did the States RATIFY?

Press, media and public figures often declare that the NDAA and the Patriot Act “REPEALED” various parts of the U.S. constituti­on. They call the NDAA “the law of the land”.

In order to repeal a part of a constituti­on, including America’s, an amending formula must be resorted to. An amending formula “ENTRENCHE­S” the constituti­on — legal word — to protect it from alteration by **ordinary legislatio­n**.

The USA has FORMAL constituti­onal amending procedures­:

“The Amendment Process

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.

The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).”

Source: http://www­.usconstit­ution.net/­constam.ht­ml#interpr­et

Did the Patriot Act and the NDAA pass both houses of Congress by a 2/3 majority and then go on to the States for ratificati­on?

If not, one would normally be looking at ordinary legislatio­n with the NDAA and the Patriot Act, and other similar “void” laws which infringe constituti­onal rights and liberties.

As Chief Justice Marshall correctly observed, ordinary legislatio­n cannot override the constituti­on. Therefore, if it conflicts with the constituti­on, it is VOID.

Delivering the opinion of the Court in Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 in 1803, Chief Justice MARSHALL said this of unconstitutional laws:

"If, then, the courts are to regard the constitution, and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature, the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.

Those, then, who controvert the principle that the constitution is to be considered, in court, as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the constitution, and see only the law.  This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written constitutions. It would declare that an act which, according to the principles and theory of our government, is entirely void, is yet, in practice, completely obligatory. It would declare that if the legislature shall do what is expressly forbidden, such act, notwithstanding the express prohibition, is in reality effectual. It would be giving to the legislature a practical and real omnipotence, with the same breath which professes to restrict their powers within narrow limits. It is prescribing limits, 178*178 and declaring that those limits may be passed at pleasure. That it thus reduces to nothing what we have deemed the greatest improvement on political institutions, a written constitution ..."

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=5&invol=137

America's rights were never REPEALED, it’s a BLUFF. 

The NDAA and the PATRIOT ACT are VOID laws which have NO POWER to amend the constitution by "repealing" any part of it.

They are simply hoping the American people won’t wake up in time to SAVE THEMSELVES before martial law is invoked by the putsch (A sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force) which has taken over the government­.

YOU NEED TO MOVE FAST to have these VOID laws legally declared VOID before they put you into the FEMA CAMPS!

Kathleen Moore
HABEAS CORPUS CANADA
The Official Legal Challenge
To North American Union
http://www.habeascorpuscanada.com
"TAKING AMERICA DOWN FOR GLOBALISM IN THE NAME OF PATRIOTISM"
http://canadian-state-of-the-union.blogspot.com/2011/06/taking-america-down-for-globalism-in.html
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/crazyforcanada