What is it called when the court either orders the imposition of an affirmative action plan or allows the parties to develop an agreed-upon plan?

The correct terminology for the situation where a court mandates the implementation of an affirmative action plan or permits the involved parties to collaboratively create one is referred to as judicial affirmative action. This term signifies the court's role in addressing issues of inequity or discrimination by ensuring that effective measures are taken to promote diversity and equal opportunities within the concerned organization or entity.

The concept of judicial affirmative action is rooted in the broader objective of affirmative action, which seeks to rectify historical injustices and prevent future discrimination. By involving the courts, there is an authoritative mechanism ensuring accountability and adherence to the established plan, which is vital for its success.

Other potential options do not accurately represent this legal context. Diplomatic measures do not pertain to legal actions within the court system. Democratic affirmative action suggests a political framework that does not fit the judicial process. Affirmative action controls could imply oversight or management tactics but lacks the specificity of court involvement found in judicial affirmative action. Thus, judicial affirmative action distinctly captures the essence of the court's directive role in managing affirmative action efforts.