In the Weeds: Immigrants & NY’s Legalized Cannabis Industry

posted in: All news | 0

While the state has celebrated the growth of its newest legal economy, many feel left out—no one more so than non-citizen immigrants. This story comes to us from Feet in 2 Worlds, an independent media outlet and journalism training program that empowers the voices of immigrant journalists.

Strains of cannabis outside of their cases but behind glass at the legal Emerald Dispensary in Bushwick, Brooklyn, NY. (Photo Credit: Iggy Monda.)

This story comes to us from Feet in 2 Worlds, an independent media outlet and journalism training program that empowers the voices of immigrant journalists.

As a way to welcome the new year, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul declared on the final day of 2024 that New York State’s budding cannabis industry had hit a milestone: it had produced $1 billion in retail sales. And that every single green bill made was legal and clean.

New York was only the 15th state to legalize adult-use cannabis, when it did so in March 2021 with the signing of the Marihuana Regulation and Taxation Act (MRTA). But New York State’s politicians and entrepreneurs had higher dreams than the 14 states that had legalized recreational cannabis before them. They saw a future where the state would become the capital of cannabis in more ways than one. 

The announcement of $1 billion in sales was the state’s way of declaring that it is catching up to other big players like California and Michigan, while pushing forward equity in the space.

Besides legalizing recreational cannabis, what New York State did with the passing of the MRTA was promise to prioritize people who had been arrested for cannabis-related offenses and targeted by police. For decades, police disproportionately arrested Black and Latino people more often than white people. The NYPD made 4,081 criminal possession of marijuana arrests in 2018. Only 287 of those arrests were of white people, while Black and Latino people accounted for 3,627 of them.

“What we do know, and we kind of talked about a lot, is everyone uses cannabis at the same rates,” said Dasheed Dawson, New York City’s first cannabis czar, who resigned at the end of March following sexual harassment accusations. “It is just certain populations — Black, Indigenous, Latinx, immigrant populations — that have been disproportionately criminalized for that same use.”

In response, the state of New York wanted to make sure that the people who were harmed most by prior drug policies had a fair, inclusive opportunity to participate.

“One of the main goals of New York State legalizing cannabis was to make sure we were leading with equity, and equity was at the center and the heart of everything we did,” said Taylor Randi Lee, the Press Secretary for the New York State Office of Cannabis Management. That state office was established on the same day adult-use cannabis was legalized. 

New York State made a commitment to expunge non-violent cannabis-related convictions. And the state promised that the first group of people to be issued retail cannabis licenses would be those who had been previously convicted for a non-violent cannabis offense—namely those in the Black and Latino communities. This type of license was called a Conditional Adult-Use Retail Dispensary (CAURD) License.

“When I read that rule right there, I was like, oh snap, this law is written for me,” said Coss Marte, one of New York’s first CAURD holders. Marte grew up on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, where drugs were a common part of everyday life. He was incarcerated three times in his life for cannabis offenses and at least once for possession of cocaine.

Once out of prison and following the passage of the MRTA, Marte not only acquired his CAURD license to sell cannabis recreationally in his Lower East Side and two other dispensary locations all named CONBUD, but he was also able to expunge his prior cannabis offenses.

“Why wouldn’t you go support a Coss Marte?” asked Solonje Burnett, an entrepreneur and consultant who runs a business called Weed Auntie. “Why wouldn’t you go to these guys who were actually arrested for either having weed or distributing weed when it was illegal?”

For Burnett, supporting businesses run by members of society who were imprisoned for cannabis offenses is beneficial for a myriad of reasons. For one, it’s healthier. According to Burnett, the people who were always selling cannabis know what product is the best quality. Legal cannabis dispensaries—unlike their unlicensed counterparts—have to be tested and approved before they can be sold. And, Burnett says, licensed stores won’t sell anything that could be potentially dangerous.

“Me going to this dispensary, even though it might be a little bit more expensive [than an unlicensed store, helps to] prop up a safe industry for my community,” says Burnett.

Secondly, Burnett and politicians will argue that supporting owners like Marte creates jobs for local communities that have been affected by state and city enforcement in the past.

“The governor’s office mandates that 50 percent of adult use cannabis licenses go to social economic and equity licensees,” added Taylor Randi Lee. “I’m proud to say that New York State’s at 54 percent.”

The MRTA was considered by many advocates to be one of the most progressive legalization efforts of cannabis in the country. But while it focuses on disenfranchised communities and even veterans and farmers, it largely leaves immigrants out of the picture.

And that’s because while cannabis is now legal to smoke and sell in the state of New York, it is still illegal at the federal level. That means an immigrant who is not a citizen can be charged with cannabis-related crimes, even if they are in a legal state or territory. So, while citizens in these locations can smoke and sell legally without worrying about legal consequences, non-citizen immigrants take the risk of losing their chance at citizenship or residency, or facing deportation.

“We have this two-tier system of justice, right? There’s one for citizens and one for immigrants,” said Benita Jain, senior advisor and federal policy counsel with the Immigrant Defense Project.

Rows of cannabis products behind glass at the legal Emerald Dispensary in Bushwick, Brooklyn, NY. (Photo Credit: Iggy Monda)

The federal government has linked cannabis with immigrants since even before the country first criminalized it.

The United States had been producing cannabis since the 17th century when it was more colloquially known as hemp. It was such a common crop that the country’s first president—George Washington—was growing it, and colonial Virginia even passed a law requiring every farmer to grow it. If they didn’t, they risked being jailed. In the 19th century, major cities, like New York, would allow for the operation of hash parlors, where people could smoke as if they were drinking at a bar.

But in November 1910, Mexican citizen Francisco Madero made a call to arms to overthrow the Mexican government, spurring on the Mexican Revolution. A result of that fighting were Mexicans immigrating to the United States.

Coincidentally, around the same time, at the beginning of the 20th century — when cannabis-like products were legal and being used in the U.S. — newspapers printed stories about violence around the border. The common thread in these stories were that immigrants from Mexico were routinely high and hurting American citizens, including “upper-class white women.” Some accused these immigrants of gifting cannabis to schoolchildren.

Other newspaper articles also targeted immigrants from India and the West Indies as a source of all the “dangerous” cannabis that was coming into the country and seducing the white population into smoking along with them. The prejudicial rhetoric continued for decades.

The movement to make cannabis illegal federally picked up in the 1930s. The first two dominos to fall were the creation of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and the naming of Harry J. Anslinger as its commissioner in 1930. Anslinger made it his mission to outlaw cannabis by any means necessary, and to do so he had to convince the public that cannabis would make the average man dangerous — even when 29 out of 30 scientists told him that his hypothesis had no scientific backing.

In 1937, he testified before Congress his belief on the dangers of the plant, but instead of using more colloquial words such as cannabis and hash, Anslinger adopted the word “marihuana” so as to use a more Spanish-sounding term that he could link with Mexicans. In his testimony, he quoted from a particularly prejudiced-laden letter from a newspaper editor that read: 

“I wish I could show you what a small marihuana cigaret can do to one of our degenerate Spanish-speaking residents. That’s why our problem is so great; the greatest percentage of our population is composed of Spanish-speaking persons, most of who are low mentally, because of social and racial conditions.”

His testimony paved the way for the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, which taxed cannabis so heavily that it made any recreational use impractical. Ironically, this legislation was enacted almost two decades after Mexico itself had already outlawed cannabis.

Anslinger may not have been able to criminalize cannabis, but his mission was completed by President Richard Nixon. In 1970, Nixon signed the Controlled Substances Act, which classified cannabis as a Schedule I drug, meaning it would be treated as an illegal substance with the highest potential for abuse and without medical benefits. It set the stage for the War on Drugs he launched the following year, which has sustained until today.

The federal government has recently began discussing whether or not it should reschedule cannabis away from Schedule I and to Schedule III, allowing it to be more accessible. And states are trying to reverse policies of 20th century American leaders — policies that have led to millions of people being arrested within the Black, Latino, and immigrant communities. This all comes as a result of a majority of Americans accepting that cannabis is not a danger to a majority of people. 

But while dozens of states have legalized adult-use cannabis, Benita Jain said that immigration laws have only been reinforced by presidents such as Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton.

“As a result of immigration laws passed in 1996, but even before that for drug-related convictions,” said Jain, “a broad range of convictions can trigger immigration detention, can result in a person being denied lawful permanent residency, can result in someone with lawful permanent residency being subject to deportation, or being unable to apply for citizenship.”

Donald Trump is now this country’s president. As a result, deportations are on the mind of many in this country, including Burnett—or the Weed Auntie.

“I’m really, really worried about what’s going to happen in 2025 with our deportation dictator coming into power,” said Burnett. “That is his modus operandi.” 

President Trump has been relatively positive about cannabis being legalized across the country, but his deportation policies are as clear as day. He isn’t the first president to deport thousands, and won’t be the first to proceed with deportations based on substances like cannabis. Just between 2002 and 2020, the U.S. deported over 47,000 people for marijuana use or possession.

And so if a non-citizen immigrant wants to join the legal cannabis economy, they must either sell illegally or take great care in taking on a position that doesn’t require being directly involved with the product. But even that comes with risks.

“Proximity is a risk factor,” said Jain. She mentioned stories of auditing work for a cannabis business, installations of security cameras, and even delivery drivers leading to federal scrutiny. “Our sense is that the closer a person who’s working in the industry is to the actual substance, the more risk they face.”

Even if the political leaders in the nation’s capital reschedule cannabis away from Schedule I, it wouldn’t help non-citizen immigrants as much as one might think. Jain says while that would be a boon to corporations and business owners looking for more tax benefits, immigrants would need more drastic action from the government if they wish to legally participate in this new cannabis economy, as a seller or consumer.

“What we need to do,” said Jain, “is to deschedule marijuana completely, and then have the immigration laws also catch up to us to that.”

Podcast credits: Hosted by Shaka Tafari. Produced by Iggy Monda. Edited by Lushik Lotus-Lee. Additional editing by Mia Warren and Quincy Surasmith. Fact Checking by Julie Schwietert Collazo. Engineering by Jocelyn Gonzales. Original theme music by Gautam Srikishan. Additional music from Blue Dot Sessions. “The Hustle” show logo by Daniel Robles. Special thanks to Scott Foletta and Solonje Burnett.

Feet in 2 Worlds is supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, The Ford Foundation, the Fernandez Pave the Way Foundation, an anonymous donor, and contributors to our annual NewsMatch campaign.

The post In the Weeds: Immigrants & NY’s Legalized Cannabis Industry appeared first on City Limits.

McDonald’s plans to hire 375,000 U.S. workers this summer

posted in: All news | 0

By DEE-ANN DURBIN

McDonald’s said Monday it plans to hire up to 375,000 U.S. restaurant employees this summer, its biggest hiring push in years.

Related Articles


As Biden-era ‘junk fee’ rule takes effect, Ticketmaster says it will display fees more clearly


You’re retired and need cash — is a HELOC the answer?


Trump’s anti-DEI battle threatens nonprofits trying to fill critical labor gaps


Here’s a look at the sectors getting a boost from the truce in the US-China trade war


Georgia become second US state to shield maker of Roundup weed killer from some cancer claims

The Chicago burger giant said the beefed-up job openings are partly due to a U.S. expansion. The company, which has more than 13,500 restaurants in the U.S., plans to open 900 more by 2027.

U.S. Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer joined McDonald’s U.S. President Joe Erlinger at a McDonald’s restaurant near Columbus, Ohio, for the hiring announcement.

“McDonald’s is sparking a ripple effect of prosperity for our workers, communities and the economy,” DeRemer said. “By expanding their workforce, the corporation will be driving investment and setting the standard for industry growth, whether as a launch pad for a different career or as a ladder for internal achievements.”

McDonald’s said its last big summer hiring spree came in 2020, when it announced plans to add 260,000 workers. At the time, the company was reopening restaurants that were closed in the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Its decision to staff up for this summer signals optimism that U.S. restaurant traffic will improve as the year unfolds.

In the January-March period, McDonald’s U.S. same-store sales — or sales at locations open at least a year — slumped 3.6%. That was the biggest U.S. decline McDonald’s has seen since the pandemic shuttered stores, restaurants, schools and other public spaces in 2020.

McDonald’s said lower- and middle-income consumers, worried about inflation and the economic outlook, cut back on fast food during the January-March period.

But other restaurant operators seem to share its optimism. U.S. restaurants and bars added more than 46,000 jobs in March and April, according to the National Restaurant Association. Chipotle said in February that it hoped to hire 20,000 workers.

Overall hiring also continues to be strong. American employers added 177,000 jobs in April as the job market showed resilience despite the uncertainty caused by President Donald Trump’s trade wars.

McDonald’s also used Monday’s event to celebrate the 10th anniversary of its Archways to Opportunity program, which has given tuition assistance, English lessons and career services to more than 90,000 employees. McDonald’s said the program has doled out $240 million in tuition assistance alone.

Anamaria Monterroso, an eight-year veteran at McDonald’s, said Archways to Opportunity will help her become of the first member of her family to graduate from college. Monterroso is currently working toward her degree in human resources at Colorado Technical University.

“Just because you work in fast food doesn’t mean your dreams end there,” Monterroso said.

Shootout in St. Paul has Frost, Sceptres thinking goalies

posted in: All news | 0

At their core, pro athletes are entertainers, paid to sell tickets to fans who want to see a good show. And if you like goals, there have been few games more entertaining than the Minnesota Frost’s wild 7-5 win over the Toronto Sceptres on Sunday evening at Xcel Energy Center.

In what was the highest-scoring game in the two-year history of the PWHL, the Frost took Game 3 and grabbed a 2-1 lead in the best-of-five league semifinal on a night where public address announcer Brian Sweeney might have been the hardest-working person in the building.

“I think it’s a fan’s dream and a coach’s nightmare, a 7-5 playoff game,” Frost coach Ken Klee said after 60 minutes of defense-optional hockey. “We found a way to win, and that’s the most important thing. Our team played hard, and we have to clean things up because the next game is going to be a lot tougher.”

Speaking to reporters via Zoom on Monday morning, Klee took a big picture view.

“Watching the film, I think it was a combination of both teams trying to stay on offense and keep attacking,” said Klee, whose team is now four wins shy of a repeat as Walter Cup champions. “When you look at it, it wasn’t huge breakdowns. Both teams were battling and both teams knew how important the game was. Watching it this morning, it was a lot of really great plays by both teams.”

Coaches aren’t the only ones having nightmares after a 12-goal playoff game. Sunday’s starting goalies, Kirsten Campbell for Toronto and Maddie Rooney for Minnesota, both have playoff goals-against averages of 4.00 or higher, and save percentages under .900. Both coaches said on Monday that their plans for who will guard the crease in Wednesday’s Game 4 are up in the air.

Toronto coach Troy Ryan said there was some discussion among coaches about pulling Campbell — who has played all three of Toronto’s playoff games — during Game 3 but decided to keep backup Carly Jackson fresh in case they decide to make a goalie change for Game 4.

But, he added, they’re not convinced a change is necessary.

“We also have trust in Soupy,” Ryan said, using Campbell’s nickname. “Soupy’s had some up-and-down games throughout the year, but ultimately we have trust in Soupy and want her to find ways to battle. … She’s a very good goalie and a driven athlete.”

In the Frost crease, Rooney has backstopped a pair of wins but Klee said they are looking at all of their options, including Nicole Hensley, with a chance to clinch the series in Game 4 at home.

“We haven’t really looked at the lineup yet. Today is an off-day for everybody and we’ll get together (Tuesday) and start looking at the lineup,” Klee said.

New intensity for an old rivalry

Between their PWHL games, their college games and their games on the international stage, it’s safe to say that Toronto forward Emma Maltais and Minnesota standout Taylor Heise know each other well.

United States forward Taylor Heise, right, and Canada forward Emma Maltais battle for the puck during the third period of a rivalry series women’s hockey game Wednesday, Nov. 8, 2023, in Tempe, Ariz. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)

Maltais is from Ontario and has played plenty of notable games for Team Canada. She also played against Heise head-to-head in the WCHA when Maltais was at Ohio State and Heise — originally from Lake City, Minn. — was winning the Patty Kazmaier Award as college hockey’s top player while with the Gophers.

But even after all of those meetings on opposite sides of a faceoff, keen observers of the first three games between Toronto and Minnesota have noticed a new level of intensity, and even scrappiness, between Maltais and Heise.

Asked about any bad blood on Monday, Heise said the physical plays are just a part of the PWHL in May and denied there is any player-specific bad blood to be had.

“I mentioned this after the first game and the second game: Hockey’s feisty, and the playoffs should be feisty,” Heise said. “If there’s not some people going at each other every game, then it’s not playoff hockey. You watch it in the NHL and you see it here. … We’ve played against each other since college and she’s a good player. She gets under people’s skin. That’s her job. I think she does it well. As for me, I love getting competitive and just being part of the game. It makes it more fun.”

While checking is not allowed in the PWHL, it is definitely the most physical brand of women’s hockey available, and Heise said that when she and Maltais have bumped into each other, it’s to be expected.

“In our league, you’re only allowed to have some body contact,” she said. “And there’s for sure been some body contact.”

Related Articles


Frost seize control of PWHL semifinal series


Frost even series after Game 2 win in Toronto against Sceptres


Women’s hockey: PWHL suspends Frost’s Britta Curl-Salemme for Game 2


Down a game, Frost waiting to hear if Curl-Salemme avoids extra discipline


Frost comeback effort falls short as Toronto takes Game 1

St. Paul WestRock plant owners look to sell ‘as soon as possible’

posted in: All news | 0

Smurfit Westrock says it intends to prepare its St. Paul paper recycling plant for sale and redevelopment “as soon as possible” following a planned closure this summer.

The company announced this month it would close the plant near Raymond and University avenues at the end of June, after 118 years in operation. Company spokespeople have declined phone interviews, but they recently confirmed the intent to sell the property, as many business advocates have hoped.

The company “has developed a comprehensive plan to remove manufacturing materials from the site, clean process tanks and take other actions to ensure the site is left in a secure and environmentally sound condition,” said a spokesperson for Smurfit Westrock, in an email. “Our intention is to decommission the site so that we can position it for sale as soon as possible.”

The Smurfit WestRock paper mill, seen from Vandalia St. in St. Paul on Wednesday, May 7, 2025. Smurfit WestRock, a global packaging company, announced May 1 that it will lay off roughly 189 employees in the permanent closure of its St. Paul coated recycled board mill at 2250 Wabash Ave., off Interstate 94 and Minnesota 280. (John Autey / Pioneer Press)

Nearly 200 workers will be let go from the facility, which manufactures coated recycled boards, when it shuts down June 30. The core facility spans 25 acres, though Smurfit Westrock owns a total of 40 acres across the site.

The property generates around $300,000 in annual property taxes. Business advocates such as the St. Paul Port Authority are eager to see light industrial redevelopment that could bring in more jobs and a greater tax base.

Meanwhile, some real estate agents see potential for a residential component, given its proximity to Interstate 94, the Green Line light rail and other retail and restaurant amenities. The site is a light rail stop away from the Fresh Thyme grocery on University Avenue.

Related Articles


St. Paul City Council ends rent control for housing built after 2004


St. Paul Port Authority, developers bullish on St. Paul’s WestRock site


St. Paul City Council gets an earful on rent control, tenant protections


St. Paul nonprofit pays $7.3M to turn Bandana Square hotel into emergency shelter


St. Paul: Grand Ave. Anthropologie/Salut site undergoing renovation for new retail, restaurants