[Poohbah]

Yes, but the number 10 is not in the Constitution, it's just an arbitrary rule Kennedy cited. Not the Supreme Court's place to determine a numerical threshold, legislatures should do that.

They SHOULD do that.

But they haven't. They have REFUSED to do that.

Absent legislative action, the judiciary has to act, or the intent and letter of the Eighth Amendment is subverted.

[APBaer]

" the judiciary has to act, or the intent and letter of the Eighth Amendment is subverted."

Too late on that, they okayed the three strikes laws recently, without regard to any proportionality between the coonduct and the life sentences.

[Viva Le Dissention]

Didn't you ever wonder why the majority didn't cite the 8th Amendment in its decision? Why it wasn't even argued?

It's not relevant. The 8th Amendment is a prohibition on government action, as in criminal cases. Like being convicted of shoplifting and getting a million dollar fine.
A civil case, however, we don't have government action. The case is wholly outside the scope of the government, since the judiciary, in theory, is only a neutral arbitrator. The jury imposes the fine, and the jury is not an agent of the government.