I believe that trust in this platform and the quality and impartiality of the information it provides is very important. For this question, my assumption is that one of the things we want to do is to continue to build this trust.
In the world outside of Stack Exchange, we are seeing a general increased concern about the prevalence of misinformation, low-quality circular reporting, and threats against freedom of speech. People are also becoming more aware of the term "unconscious bias" (UB), thanks to efforts being made by organizations to include courses on the topic in their mandatory training.
UB training seeks to raise awareness of the mental shortcuts that lead to snap judgments
While Stack Exchange was born out of the needs of coders, it has expanded into many other domains such as medicine and politics. These are fields in which "right" and "wrong" can be less well-defined and where exposure to a more diverse range of perspectives can be helpful.
People unfamiliar with Stack Exchange may ask themselves, "How can I know if I can trust this site?"
Now everyone has the power to vote, and this is democratic. But deleting an answer is another way that an individual can put their hand on the scale. The fact that this power is concentrated in the hands of a relatively small number of individuals may concern some people.
Of course, what we want is for the "power to delete" to be used as intended - to maintain the standard of having high-quality answers on the site - and not to cause certain points of view to be favored over other points of view.
Let's consider some options:
Option 1: We lower the reputation requirement and increase the number of people who have the ability to see other users' deleted answers, comment on them, and vote to undelete them. This might improve people's trust in both the site and in the people who are empowered to delete low-quality answers.
Option 2: We raise the reputation requirement and decrease the number of people who have the ability to see other users' deleted answers. This might have the effect of increasing the rate at which moderators review posts, since they would feel like fewer people (and only people with high reputation) were overseeing their work.
We should also consider that it currently takes a lot of time and effort to earn the privilege to see other people's deleted answers. But there are many well-educated and well-informed people who simply cannot afford the time it takes to build the high level of reputation required to earn this privilege. But these people may still be qualified to participate constructively in the process of ensuring that moderation is both done well, and done impartially.
So, if we wanted to increase people's trust in the site, what would be the best strategy? Should we raise, lower, or maintain the current level of reputation required to view other people's deleted answers?
Note: I've done my best to ensure that this is an original question. I did some research and came across some related, but different, questions, including...
Ensure that users can access feedback on deleted questions This is about seeing feedback, not deleted answers.
Should under 10k users be allowed to see select deleted answers? This question suggests that a reputation change would be good for educating newer users, which is a different (and perhaps less compelling) argument.
Why should 10k rep users view self-deleted answers? This is about self-deleted answers - the point being that if I delete my own answer for whatever personal reason I may have, it should not be visible to anyone - even moderators.
Can we trust the impartiality of answers on Stack Exchange anymore? This question seemed to be directed at a specific layoff event that occurred in the past.