What legal principle did Garrett's case against the Hawaii state law revolve around?

In reviewing Garrett's case against the Hawaii state law, the central legal principle involved would be closely associated with the Supremacy Clause. This clause establishes that federal law takes precedence over state laws. When an individual challenges a state law, they often do so on the grounds that the state law conflicts with federal law, thereby invoking this principle.

In many cases, individuals argue that state regulations infringe on federally protected rights or provisions. If Garrett's case involved an assertion that a Hawaii state law was inconsistent with a federal statute or constitutional provision, it would indeed fall under the Supremacy Clause's jurisdiction.

Understanding the Supremacy Clause is critical in cases where conflicts arise between state and federal law, and recognizing this can illuminate the broader legal framework within which states operate. This can help clarify why individuals may seek to challenge state laws that they believe undermine federally recognized rights or statutes.