The courthouse was preparing for another busy morning when a woman wearing a plain janitorial uniform pushed a cleaning cart through the main hall.
She carefully cleaned the polished floor while attorneys, employees, and visitors moved toward the courtrooms.
Then a court administrative worker noticed her.
“Stop,” the worker called out. “Who told you to bring that cart through here?”
The cleaner looked up.
“I’m simply finishing this area,” she replied.
The worker pointed toward a service corridor and insisted that cleaning staff should remain away from the main hall during working hours.
The cleaner remained calm.
“You can explain the procedure without speaking to me disrespectfully,” she said.
Instead of lowering her voice, the worker became increasingly impatient.
She moved the cleaning cart toward the wall and told the woman not to interfere with people who had official business inside the courthouse.
Several attorneys stopped and watched.
“I’m keeping this building clean,” the woman replied. “That is legitimate work too.”
The employee insisted that she understood how the courthouse operated and could immediately recognize when someone was somewhere they did not belong.
The cleaner’s expression changed.
“You should verify the facts before making that kind of judgment,” she said. “Decisions made in a courthouse can carry consequences.”
The worker interpreted the statement as a challenge.
“Don’t speak to me as though you’re a judge,” she replied.
The hallway became unusually quiet.
The cleaner slowly removed her gloves.
“That’s an interesting thing to say,” she replied.
She reached into the cart and removed an official identification wallet.
The worker looked at the name.
Judge Williams.
The woman she had been attempting to remove was a presiding judge at the courthouse.
That morning, Judge Williams had participated anonymously in a workplace initiative intended to better understand how different courthouse employees were treated while performing everyday duties.
The worker’s expression immediately changed.
“Judge Williams, I’m sorry,” she said. “I didn’t recognize you.”
But the judge explained that recognition was precisely what should not determine someone’s level of courtesy.
“You didn’t need to know I was a judge,” she replied. “You needed to speak professionally to someone doing their job.”
A senior administrator was called to the hallway.
Judge Williams requested that the incident be formally documented and that the employee be removed from public-facing responsibilities while management reviewed what had happened.
She also made clear that courthouse procedures still mattered.
If cleaning equipment was prohibited from certain areas at specific times, employees had every right to explain those rules.
What was unacceptable was using a person’s job or appearance as an excuse for humiliation.
The courthouse soon returned to its normal schedule, but the encounter left staff members discussing a larger principle.
A courthouse is built around evidence, fairness, and careful judgment.
Those principles matter outside the courtroom too.
Before deciding who deserves respect, sometimes the best approach is the simplest one: treat everyone with it from the beginning.
