When A Scientific Theory Contradicts A Scientific Law

Scientific Laws have been observed and are used to explain how things have been and will be in the future.  Scientific theories attempt to explain why the laws work as they do.  Matt Anticole did an awesome job of explaining this in his TED-Ed video.
For example, Archimede's Principle of Buoyancy, which explains why objects float, has been tested and observed repeatedly, making it into a law. So have Newton's laws of motion been tested and observed.
There is another scientific law, the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which states that the "entropy of any isolated system always increases" which means that our Universe, which is an isolated system, gets more disorderly and simple over time.1  We have observed this law ourselves in how our bedrooms will become messy, cardboard left outside breaks down, our trucks get rust on them, and food molds.  The only way to combat the 2nd law is to use energy and intelligence to repair items or clean rooms.
What happens when a scientific theory contradicts a scientific law? The theory has to go.  A law is repeatable.  It can be tested and observed.  A theory is an attempted explanation.  If even one example refutes the theory, the theory must be discarded or revised.
The theory of evolution states that the Universe and everything in it is going from simple to complex and becoming more organized over time.  This is in direct opposition to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and in direct opposition to what you and I observe on a daily basis.  This fact is one of the main reasons that the theory of evolution must be discarded or revised.

1 The Three Laws of Thermodynamics. Lumen. Introduction to Chemistry.  Retrieved from:  https://courses.lumenlearning.com/introchem/chapter/the-three-laws-of-thermodynamics/