SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge in San Francisco said Tuesday that he is disinclined to suspend California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage while a lawsuit challenging it as a violation of the U.S. Constitution proceeds in his court.

In a tentative order, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker said he'd rather move directly to a speedy trial on the case's merits than grant a preliminary injunction that would temporarily allow gay nuptials.

"Because entering a preliminary injunction may raise novel concerns that could be avoided through a prompt decision on the merits, the court's tentative plan is instead to proceed expeditiously to trial," Walker wrote.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who are defendants in the suit, had argued against staying the ban, known as Proposition 8. They argued that allowing same-sex couples to resume marrying while the litigation advances would create unnecessary confusion, both for the couples and the state.

But they had also urged Walker to take up the case quickly. Brown also has sided with the plaintiffs — an unmarried lesbian couple from Northern California and an unmarried gay couple from Southern California — in maintaining that Proposition 8 violates their civil rights.

A hearing on the injunction had been scheduled for Thursday. Walker wants to use the time instead for setting a trial schedule and outlining the issues he wants lawyers on both sides of the case to address moving forward.

Former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, one of the lawyers representing the two couples, said Tuesday that he was not disappointed by Walker's decision. Judge Walker, Olson noted, made a point of indicating in Tuesday's proposed order that gay couples have sufficient evidence to show they have been harmed by Proposition 8.

"We are very happy. What we have wanted all along is for this case to move expeditiously to a final judgment that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional," he said.

Ordinarily, a civil lawsuit could take a year or more to be heard in court. Given Walker's favoring a faster timeline, it would not be unreasonable to expect him to hear the Proposition 8 challenge by the end of the year, Olson said.

Walker on Tuesday also gave the ballot measure's sponsors permission to intervene as parties in the case, noting that with the attorney general poised to argue for the other side, their interests would otherwise not be represented in the proceedings.

A lawyer for the coalition of religious groups that sponsored Proposition 8 did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment on the judge's order.