I am worried about one thing on the fine. The basis for it was the difference between loan terms with Trump's personal guarantee and without. A more precise, and unknowable, measure would have been the difference in terms with a personal guarantee with Trump's accurate wealth disclosed versus the inflated wealth.
Also, quite a bit of loan activity was outside the statute of limitations, starting with the closing of all of them. The "bad acts" within the statute of limitations were continued submission of false SFC as a loan requirement. So, an even more precise calculation would have been loan terms had Trump not lied on SFC and those that he did. In other words, how would the lenders have adjusted the loan, post-closing, had his true condition been known. Both of these I think may be substantial frailties in the judgment.
The part about the 8th Amendment is just woolgathering. The initial post referred only to cruel and unusual punishment, which is probably not the pertinent part of the 8th Amendment, and, as was pointed out, virtually nothing is cruel and unusual. But, in some contexts, the excessive fines portion may have some teeth. Whether that is here or not is a different story.