The following statement is necessarily true:
L¯1 (Complement of L1) is recursive
The complement of a context-free language is recursive, because a context-free language can be recognized by a non-deterministic pushdown automata (PDA), and the complement of a language recognized by a PDA can be recognized by a deterministic finite automata (DFA), which is a simpler machine.
The following statement is not necessarily true:
L¯2 (Complement of L2) is recursive
The complement of a recursively enumerable but not recursive language may or may not be recursive. If L2 is recursive, then L¯2 is recursive. But if L2 is not recursive, then L¯2 is not recursive.
The following statement is not necessarily true:
L¯1 is context-free
The complement of a context-free language is not necessarily context-free. Since context-free languages can be recognized by pushdown automata, and the complement of context-free languages may not be recognizable by any pushdown automata, it may not be context-free.
The following statement is not necessarily true:
L¯1 ∪ L2 is recursively enumerable
The union of two languages may or may not be recursively enumerable. It depends on the specific languages L1 and L2, and whether or not their union is recursively enumerable can only be determined by analyzing the properties of those specific languages.