Elections are “often rough-and-tumble events,” wrote U.S. District Court Judge D. Brock Hornby in his decision dismissing the libel suit filed by unsuccessful legislative candidate James M. Schatz.

In both his description and his decision, the judge was correct.

Schatz charged that misleading ads paid for by the Republican State Leadership Committee, a national political group that spent lavishly in a handful of Maine Senate races last year, may have cost him the election. Schatz charged that allegations in the ads were false, defamatory and damaging to his campaign and he was entitled to relief.

Hornby, however, found that while the allegations were misleading, they fell well within the bounds of what we, for good reason, tolerate in election campaigns. Imprecise facts and negative interpretations can paint a false picture, but, Hornby wrote, “that is the price that we pay for unfettered debate on public issues as protected by the First Amendment.”

This does not mean that candidates and their supporters have a right to lie, or to make charges with reckless disregard for the truth, but the bar for interfering with political speech is high and it should be. For one thing, how many people would enter the political arena if they knew that they could face a lawsuit just for saying something that turned out to be wrong? And would we really want courts, which are a branch of the government, vetting candidates’ statements, branding them as true or false?

Schatz is right that the ads put up against him gave a misleading message. They made it look as though he canceled his town’s annual fireworks display and funneled public money into a political campaign. Actually, as a Blue Hill selectman, Schatz was on the losing side of the fireworks vote and it was the local town meeting that appropriated funds for the school consolidation repeal referendum, not him.

But ultimately, the only court that should judge the credibility of those claims is one that votes on Election Day. Most people know that there are two sides to most stories and that political operatives are acting in their own self-interest.

As Hornby wrote, these are rough-and-tumble events, and it is the voters’ job to figure out who’s telling the truth.