All modern law systems have methods to resolve conflicts between differing law interpretations. Every law falls somewhere on a priority list. At the top (in the US) is the constitution and it's amendments (with the amendments higher than the constitution). Then federal laws. Then federal executive orders. Then ... This is a very complex topic with dozens of exceptions and weird cases (for example court orders have higher precedence than federal laws, except if ...).
But the end result is very simple : if 2 laws conflict one is more important than the other, and you get to ignore one of them. To further qualify this principle you have to build in perspective : it only matters what you see personally, not "the truth", only how the situation appeared to you.
All modern law systems have methods to resolve conflicts between differing law interpretations. Every law falls somewhere on a priority list. At the top (in the US) is the constitution and it's amendments (with the amendments higher than the constitution). Then federal laws. Then federal executive orders. Then ... This is a very complex topic with dozens of exceptions and weird cases (for example court orders have higher precedence than federal laws, except if ...).
But the end result is very simple : if 2 laws conflict one is more important than the other, and you get to ignore one of them. To further qualify this principle you have to build in perspective : it only matters what you see personally, not "the truth", only how the situation appeared to you.