I think it's on topic as long as the specific current event is related to politics as defined in the help center. For example, events related to Brexit, an election, diplomacy, the United Nations are in scope. If certain officials have a relation to those events, then asking for their (public) response should be in scope as well.
Of course, if the current event has no relation to politics, then it's mostly a trivia question. For example, question asking whether some politician or official hears Yanny or Laurel in the infamous auditory illusion has little bearing on anything related to politics as defined in the help center (even though a politician's opinion is part of the question).
I think an important criterion for determining the scope should be whether a question adds value to the site. I think these kinds of questions can be interesting, they don't stand out among other questions on the site, and they can be related to scope of the site. Therefore, I would be against a blanket ban on this question format.
Aside from that, the question would still have to meet the regular rules (verifiable with public sources, good-faith effort, not too broad, not opinion-based).
Under your question on main, StephenG posted a relevant concern:
@JJJ So tomorrow and the next day and the day after that are answers supposed to be updated with every new statement by an official or lawyer representing them ? It's news and not suitable for a question here as there is no resolution yet E.g. tomorrow they could "correct" what they said or statements in court could contradict it or confirm it or a bit of both. When do we stop answering an open question like this ?
So the main concern is that answers are a snapshot of the current stage of the event. I think that's a fair concern, but it's not new or specific to these kinds of questions.
Indeed, many political questions are related to changing events. Questions about election results while the winner hasn't been declared, or questions about Brexit negotiations before an agreement is signed, they are all subject to change.
Ideally, the question would be phrased in a way that outdated answers are not invalidated. For example, 'what is the position of X in relation to event Y'? If X takes a position on day 1, and changes it on day 2, then any answer explaining the first or second (or both) position(s) would (partially) answer the question.
Answers and edits are always timestamped, and if it helps, we can always add a disclaimer on what period it covers in the answer (or the question if we want to limit answers to a specific time).