Neon's claim seems to be that audio was inserted into the SCOTUS recording, specifically audio of RBG. If this was done, it would be equally possible to insert audio of others addressing RBG.
So the key question would be – does the audio of RBG, or of others addressing RBG, contain any specific language that could only have come from this hearing (could not have been excised from some other event))?
I haven't listened to the audio myself (I realize I should) … but since this was being discussed, thought I should present the question.
A friend who is an audio expert looked at the Neon article, inspected the audio files, and agrees that the audio in that file appears to be edited - specifically in having the exact same original audio present twice in the proceedings. (Which would be impossible if it were genuine.)