Dear Big Dan,
As my maternal Abuela (Grandma Maria) aged, her sharp mind began to slip. I used to take her shopping at the local Mercado and where the color orange would mesmerize her. I’d find her in aisles transfixed. gaping at anything orange — tangerines, lox, carrots, Cheetos, Fanta Soda, and, especially, cans of candied yams.
Old age is not for sissies. Then she would tell me that the paradox of life is no one wants to grow old, or die young.
Then I’d have to tug her away from the yams. Somehow she always gravitated to pickled herring as well, but that’s a different story.
Anyway, what’s the question again? Oh yes.
Are candied yams admissible in a court of law?
The short answer, Big Dan, is yes.
Yams (sic candied) were admissible in the landmark decision by the Supreme Court, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978).
Basically, the court held up affirmative action, in spite of Allan P. Bakke’s charges of reverse discrimination. Special prosecutor Archibald Cox known for his flamboyant courtroom demeanor, actually brought in a can of candied yams as evidence to make his point that mashed potatoes inherently received preferential treatment, whereas as yams (sweet potatoes?) were seldom served in the dorm cafeterias.
The yams were admissible but had little bearing on the decision, and ultimately Bakke was admissible and admitted to Med school. I doubt I would ever select Bakke as my primary care doctor, always wondering if he only got in due to yam bias.
— El Gorto