For the second question, the answer is "sometimes".  It depends on how $X$ intersects the other components.  Let me sketch out one approach to this question.

Suppose that $Y = X \cup Z$ where $X$ is one irreducible component and $Z$ is the union of the other irreducible components.  We have the following short exact sequence:
$$0 \to O_Y \to O_X \oplus O_Z \to O_{X \cap Z} \to 0.$$

Fix a point $x \in X \cap Z$, we will explore whether $X$ is Cohen-Macaulay at $x$.  Taking local cohomology, we have
$$\dots \to H^{i-1}_x (O_W) \to H^i_x(O_Y) \to H^i_x(O_X) \oplus H^i_x(O_Z) \to H^i_x(O_{W}) \to H^{i+1}_x(O_Y) \to \dots$$
where $W = X \cap Z$ (sorry, LaTeX was acting up when I was putting $X \cap Z$ in subscripts above).

Anyway, since $Y$ is Cohen-Macaulay, the $H^i_x(O_Y) = 0$ for $i < \dim Y = d$, we need to prove the same for $X$.  For example, if $Y$ and $W$ is Cohen-Macaulay *EDIT:* and $W$ is of dimension one smaller than $X$, and $H^{d-1}_x(O_W) \to H^{d}_x(Y)$ injects then this follows immediately.  Alternately, $Y$ is CM and if $H^i_x(O_Z) \to H^i_x(O_W)$ is surjective for all $i$, then you also get the desired result.