Not true. "Laws" can be wrong and still be a "law". For example "the law of gravity". However, the theory called "general relativity" has superseded it.
You (and others) are attempting to make the point that since Newton's observations constituted a "law", and Einstein's constituded a "theory", that somehow Darwin's speculative story has equal weight at the table of scientific discourse as empiricism. Sorry to say, that's ridiculous.
The reality of the situation was that Newton stated that certain physical laws govern objects (we know this to be true at the level of the reference frame of earth), and Einstein expanded this knowledge to the (gross) universe. Through quantum mechanics we may yet get to a GUT. Nevertheless, none of this invalidates what Newton first observed.