I say yes. The man could hit a baseball better than almost anyone who ever lived. His career OPS+ of 154 is tied with Frank Robinson for 25th all-time, and he finished his career with a .312/.411/.585 slash line and 555 home runs. By any measure of performance the man is a Hall of Famer.
Baseball has a system of punishment in place for violating its banned substance policy, and it does not involve ineligibility for Cooperstown. By the same token, I can’t think of any other rule-breaking that evokes similar outrage from Hall of Fame voters. You’re infamous for illegally doctoring the baseball as a pitcher? Not only will you get in the Hall of Fame, we’ll all have a good laugh about your vast array of rule breaking for years to come. You’re suspected of using a banned (or not even officially banned) chemical substance during a portion of your career? No Hall for you!
Whatever the Hall of Fame should be, one thing it shouldn’t be is a final punishment for rule breaking. The Hall isn’t about holding out some final consequence for breaking a rule or sinning against the game in some abstract sense, it’s about remembering and immortalizing the greatest baseball players of all-time and all eras. At least until we have some concrete proof that steroids drastically increase offensive production, the idea that one of the top 30 hitters in the long and storied history of baseball has a better chance of not being on the ballot in his second year of eligibility than of ever making it into the Hall is a shame, and an outrage.