Indians are a different case, and a limited one. They were treated as having sovereign status even though they did not have sovereign territories, i.e. they were here first, so they get special treatment.
The law you cite just put them on the same basis as everyone else, gave them the same rights that everyone else born here had, it didn't take anything away from them.
If you want to take anything away from people, you're going to need a Constitutional amendment.
If that's the case, and you knew that, then you deliberately lied when you said this:
"This is what the people who drafted the amendment intended it to mean. They did not intend it to exclude any child born within the United States except for children of people with diplomatic immunity. Since the day the amendment went into effect it has never been interpreted to exclude any other children born in the United States."