IANAL, which should be evident, but.. The lower courts already felt the fine was excessive, but declined to rule so because they felt they were not subject to

IANAL, which should be evident, but.. The lower courts already felt the fine was excessive, but declined to rule so because they felt they were not subject to the 8th amendment. The Supreme Court ruled that they were in fact subject to the 8th amendment, and sent the case back to the State court to re-evaluate under the new guidance. The Supreme court generally tries to rule as precisely and efficiently as possible. Since the most prominent question under their jurisdiction was the application of the 8th amendment to the states, they ruled on that issue and remanded for the remainder of the case to be resolved by the lower case with the 8th amendment applied. Now the lower court, which is a perfectly capable entity, will rule on the case, applying the 8th amendment as directed by the Supreme Court. If the lower court then rules the fine was not excessive, that ruling as well would be subject to review by the higher court. But it was not necessary at this time for the Supreme Court to rule on this as the ruling on the 8th amendment will permit the lower court to do it's job and re-evaluate.