In his arguments in brown v. board of education, the lawyer for oliver and linda brown claimed that “separate but equal” public schools were
neither separate nor equal.
separate but not truly equal.
equal but not truly separate.
both separate and equal.

The correct answer is separate but not truly equal.

During this era, public schools were not equal by any means. All black schools usually received less funding, had less teachers, had older textbooks/materials, and did not have nearly as nice of facilities (buildings) in comparison to all white schools. These were all reasons why black citizens wanted to desegregate schools, as they knew that this integration of black and white students would result in better opportunities for their children.

 SEPARATE BU NOT TRULY EQUAL

Historical context:

Brown v. The Board of Education (1954) overturned an older Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which had said that segregation laws were acceptable as long as equal facilities were available.  Brown v. The Board of Education asserted that separate educational facilities are inherently unequal and therefore the "separate but equal" policy was unconstitutional.  The decision in Brown v. the Board of Education mandated an end to segregation in education.

the bar kochba rebellion (132-135) against the roman empire, also known as the second jewish-roman war, was the second major jewish revolt in judea and the last of the great jewish-roman wars.

after the first jewish-roman war of the years 66-73, the roman authorities took measures to crush any new attempt of rebellion in judea. his political situation was modified and instead of a prefect a governor of praetorian rank was appointed, and in the ruins of jerusalem the seat of a complete roman legion, the legio x fretensis was established.

the political and religious direction of the jewish people was left in the hands of the sanhedrin, with initial headquarters in yavne.

the direct causes of the rebellion vary according to the source. the roman historian dio cassius (155-229) attributes the revolt to the decision of hadrian to found in the place of jerusalem a roman city called aelia capitolina (aelia by its own name and capitolina in honor of the roman god jupiter). on the other hand, the jewish sources, while recognizing this resolution as true, assign higher priority to the decrees dictated by hadrian that forbade the brit milah (circumcision), the respect of the sabbath and the laws of purity in the family.

hadrian's intention was to "civilize" and incorporate the jews once and for all into the greco-roman culture. for greek and roman culture, circumcision was an intolerable mutilation.

the jewish tradition tells in the midrash tanjuma a meeting between rabbi akiva and the governor turnus rufus, where he asked for an explanation about the circumcision.

an additional legion, the legio vi ferrata, moved to the province to maintain order, and work began in the year 131 after the governor of judea, turnus rufus performed the founding ceremony of aelia capitolina. a roman coin with the inscription aelia capitolina was struck in the year 132.

the tannaim rabbi akiva, who without being named nasi directed the sanhedrin, convinced the other members to support the imminent rebellion.

the jewish leaders carefully planned the second rebellion to avoid the numerous errors that had been committed in the first one. in the year 132 the rebellion led by bar kochba quickly expanded from modiim throughout the country, defeating the x roman legion based in jerusalem and destroying the xxii roman legion that had come from egypt.