The top half is a chain of reasons. The first reason "We would feel it was right to cross the border without permission" is in a box with an arrow next to it pointing to the next reason, "We should recognize illegal crossing as ethical," which in turn has an arrow from it pointing to the reason "Border walls and detention centers are unjust," which points to the final claim, "We need a new policy that offers respect and help to migrants." Below, in red, with an arrow pointing up toward the final claim, is the counterargument "Completely open borders would put our security at risk." Below the counterargument, the response to the counterargument has been changed to blue, and the response is labeled “Rebuttal/Limit: there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people." This response still has an arrow from it pointing up toward the main claim to show that it supports the main claim. In addition, two limits in blue type have been added. The text “[Limit: If we were in desperate circumstances]” has a blue arrow pointing upward to the first reason to indicate that it modifies the statement “We would feel it was right to cross the border without permission." Next to it, the text “[Limit: If migrants cross because of desperate circumstances]” has an arrow pointing up to indicate that it limits the second reason, “"We should recognize illegal crossing as ethical."