When the Supreme Court cleared a path for President Trump to continue pursuing proposed restrictions on voting by mail, the justices laid out their reasoning in a 10-page opinion—marking a departure from how the court had routinely handled emergency requests during the early months of Mr. Trump's second term. During Mr. Trump's first year in office, the court was inundated with 30 emergency requests related to his policies, ruling with little or no explanation in at least a dozen orders. A year later, the justices issued at least several pages of reasoning in the three emergency applications filed by the administration in Mr. Trump's second year in office.

The dramatically reduced number of applications makes evaluating the action of the justices in this moment difficult. Still, the fact that they are now more routinely explaining themselves in response to administration emergency requests shows how the court is adapting to the pace of the Trump era. It also suggests that the justices, who pride themselves in operating above the political fray, appear to have taken notice of complaints from the public, members of Congress and their own judicial colleagues about unexplained, consequential orders.

With a little more than two months until the midterm election, the pace of voting-related requests will almost certainly pick up.