The Court rejected the claimed Presidential immunity as irrelevant.
"This was the case where Trump argued that he enjoys "absolute immunity" while in office, an argument the lower court called "repugnant to the nation's governmental structure and constitutional values."
The 3-judge panel declined to rule on that issue at all, ruling instead that Mazars, Inc was subpoenaed for the documents, not Donald Trump, and therefore they don't even have to address that argument.
“We emphasize again the narrowness of the issue before us,” the judges wrote. “This appeal does not require us to consider whether the president is immune from indictment and prosecution while in office, nor to consider whether the president may lawfully be ordered to produce documents for use in a state criminal proceeding.”
