I'm sure her representation, who likely are working pro bono, will challenge the fines.

They did, as part of that order those challenges were denied. No idea if they can appeal that bit. IANAL.

I understand they already did (the same order mentions it) and they were denied. Of course, they could appeal I presume.

Despite rhetoric and protestation otherwise, "purely malicious" is a pretty good description of the US legal system.

I know people that work on that end of things, and honestly the majority seem to be well meaning people who are trying to do the right thing and not be mean spirited in their pursuit of convictions. Of course that doesn't mean they're perfect, but in (my admittedly not comprehensively systematic experience) the majority are not malicious. But it only takes, say, 10% to paint the whole group that way. Same with judges. The extremes get publicity, but I am close with a few lawyers who tell me the judges they deal with are fully capable of exercising compassion when it comes to dealing with individual circumstances.

Everything about the legal actions surrounding Assange seems purely malicious. A number of different governments (in the US, UK and Sweden) are trying to make the point, "Don't publish our dirty secrets or else."